Talk:State-of-the-Art Car/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) 12:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comment

• The article mainly talks about the history. Maybe add another section "Today" and describe the current situation.
  • I've added a few words to indicate that it's been at the same location since 1989.
• Or make a separate section for specifications.
  • I've separated design/development and testing into two top=level sections, and added a bit more about the specifications. How does that look?
• Also move the citation from lead WP:CITELEAD.
  • CITELEAD allows citations in the lede if needed. In this case, it was added because an editor was arguing about the correct capitalization of the name.
    • If not arguing anymore (I don't find any), I will prefer removing that. Maybe add it here "1971 to manage the State-of-the-Art Car (SOAC) project."  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  08:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
      •  Done
• Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, New York City, and Philadelphia - wikilink them.
  •  Done
• Maybe add a note for Lo- and Hi-density, why they are Lo and Hi instead of Low and High. Its something new for first time readers like me.
  • I don't have an explanation for that, other than "the 70s were a weird time"...
• "(The other two operating..." the bracket starts but doesnt end.
  •  Done
• "1676mm broad gauge" use {{Track gauge}} template for things like this.
  •  Done
• "small loading gauge" also add the dimensions. Pi.1415926535
  •  Done

 Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  19:57, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments! I believe I've addressed all so far. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

• One more thing. Describe the mixed reactions of operating agencies, like how they were opposite to people's reactions as they dropped the project.
  • I've added what I can; the source doesn't say much.
• Also add the scrapping year in infobox. Other than these, I dont find any other issues.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  08:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
  • None were scrapped. I've added the number preserved.
    • Yeah, preserved...

Congrats, passed.  Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe  18:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC)