Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article review/MTR/archive3

< Wikipedia:Featured article review‎ | MTR
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Casliber via FACBot (talk) 3:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC) [1].

MTR edit

Notified: Mailer diablo, Citobun, WikiProject Hong Kong, WikiProject Trains, diff 2020-11-17

Review section edit

I am nominating this featured article for review because: there is considerable uncited text, information that appears only in the lead, very short paragraphs, near-duplicate images, inconsistencies in citation formatting. Needs quite a lot of attention. FemkeMilene (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yay, another total mess of an article.

  • "Initial Proposals": Large chunks of uncited text.
  • "Line Extensions": Very choppy, lots of one-sentence paragraphs.
  • "Partial privatisation and merger": {{refimprove}} tag from December 2018
  • "Recent extensions": Section should be titled differently per WP:RECENT; also has several sentences in a row beginning with "the".
  • "Future expansions": Improperly formatted list (I have literally never seen anyone use 1.) 2.) 3.) instead of the number sign). Also needs to be watched for updating.
  • "Infrastructure": Section consists entirely of images and a table. Is there a better and less cluttered way to present this?
  • "Rolling Stock": Entire table is unreferenced.
  • I also feel the sections underneath (Metro Cammell EMU (DC), Adtranz-CAF EMU, etc.) could be better integrated. There are too many subsections and a lot of image bunching.
  • "Commerce and journals" -- entire section is unsourced
  • "Head office" - very short section, could be expanded or combined. Also not sure of that red link.
  • "Visual identity" - very short and unreferenced; expand or combine with something else. I'm not sure if this is even needed.
  • "Involvement in 2019–20 Hong Kong protests" -- I believe you're not supposed to put links in headers; also there is no summary here, just a {{main}}.
  • The references are very inconsistent in formatting. I also spot a few YouTube fan videos which are not in any way reliable sources.

This is another article so thoroughly deficient in WP:WIAFA content that once again I feel a need to accelerate the delisting. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Give this at least a week or two to see if anyone is still interesting in working on this. I know there is a large HK transport community out there, just not sure if they are still active on this especially in the current climate. I don't think I can rework on this myself without spending a significant period of time, but if there is a team effort then this might still be salvageable within the timeframe. One thing I obviously noticed is there is a lot of scope creep added to the article since promotion, and I am inclined that whole sections would need to be removed outright for the quality to improve. - Mailer Diablo 09:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section edit

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing, structure, prose, and style. DrKay (talk) 09:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/MTR/archive3&oldid=1014245483"