Talk:Mangotsfield railway station/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 14:35, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Waiting since March? I'll do this. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:35, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

It's been that long? I'd kind of forgotten this actually! Thanks The Rambling Man! -mattbuck (Talk) 19:18, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Just FYI I am still engaged, but it may be a few days before I can do the lead stuff. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

The Rambling Man: beyond the capitalisation I've made all the requested changes. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Comments

• The lead could use a little expansion, it's quite short considering the length of the article.

  I have expanded the lead a bit. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:42, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

• "Mangotsfield and Bath Branch Line," -> branch line (not capitalised).

  This is another controversial area. There was a big purge of capitalisations earlier this year which was quite vigorously protested. I've always taken the opinion that the Branch Line or Main Line is part of the name and thus as a proper noun should be capitalised. I think London Underground takes a lot of the blame here for their insistence on lower case. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• Consider linking junction station.

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "Less than two months, on" missing "... later" or "In ..."

  Added "later". -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• Consider linking chain (unit) as it's quite uncommon outside this kind of article.

  It's linked in the notes section. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

  It should be linked first time in the prose too. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

  While I understand where you're coming from the whole subject of measuring in chains has been under intense scrutiny recently at WT:UKRAIL and the style here was about as close to consensus as anyone could get. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

  The concept of linking technical terms on their first usage in prose transcends local project guidelines. I’m cool with you using this archaic measurement unit, but please link it first time in the prose for our readers’ benefit. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:28, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

• "It wasn't until " avoid contractions.

  Reworded

• "Line closed, station open." no full stop required for these notes. Apply to later table too.

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "(1845-1866)" use en-dash here (per WP:DASH). Apply to later table too.

  Done. I hate dash politics. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• Image captions which aren't complete sentences, i.e. are sentence fragments, shouldn't have a full stop (e.g. "The original station building, now a private house.")

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "Branch Line" again.
• " nine trains per day each way, increasing to 18 each" go for 9/18 or nine/eighteen per MOSNUM.

  Did not know that, though I suppose it makes sense. Changed to digits. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "The Western Daily Press described " should be "The Western Daily Press described "

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:38, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "[24][26][1](p86)" numerical order-> "[1](p86)[24][26]"

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• " in 1948" that's a easter egg link, to be avoided. Perhaps rephrase so make it less "surprising" to our readers.

Done. Thanks Redrose64. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

• Great Western Main Line -> main line.
• Other "Branch Line" instances in the latter table.
• "Gloucester - composed" en-dash.

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• " van - had " ditto.

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:03, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "passengers —- Thomas" just an en-dash!

  I have no idea how that happened. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• "severe injuries.[44][46][45] " numerical order.

  Done. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:42, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

That's my first pass. All the GA criteria are basically met, but these issues would just polish the article nicely. Once you're done, I'll take one more look. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:24, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Comment mattbuck looking better, I removed the spaces around the en-dashes for year ranges, and then just noticed you have a Daily Mail reference (41 I think) in there, and per WP:DAILYMAIL, we don't consider that a reliable source. I think replace that and we're just about there. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:31, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I have replaced it with a BBC article, and shall thoroughly castigate myself for using the Daily [appropriate slur of your choice] in an article. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

All good then, so I'm passing this to GA. Well done. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:34, 14 October 2018 (UTC)