Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Higher-speed rail/1

Higher-speed rail[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Large portions of this page are uncited. There are also parts that are poorly written. Steelkamp (talk) 07:15, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with nom. I would also add: ref's need to be in main article, not the lead section (MOS:LEAD); the "In operation" and "Current efforts" sections are unclear as to what the distinction is there; the significant focus on China in the "current operations" section could form a separate article (e.g., High-speed rail in Australia). Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 07:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Specific problems are as follows:

alternatives to larger efforts to create or expand the high-speed rail networks.
Lead should be longer.
Though the definition of higher-speed rail varies from country to country, most countries refer to rail services operating at speeds up to 200 km/h (125 mph). Should not be in its own paragraph
but usually falling short on the intended speeds. Why the "usually". Surely if it fulfilled intended speeds, then it would become true high speed rail.
the speed range for India's higher-speed rail will be between 160 and 200 km/h (100 and 125 mph). What's with the "will be"?
A table in the middle of a list?
In Canada, the assumption about grade crossing is that operating higher-speed rail services between 160 and 200 km/h (99 and 124 mph) would require "improved levels of protection in acceptable areas". This is a nebulous statement.
In developing higher-speed rail services, one of those safety systems must be used. This seems to be original research.
which regulates the speed limits of trains with Class 5, Class 6, Class 7 and Class 8 Is this grammatically correct?
In the United States, railroad tracks are largely used for freight with at-grade crossings. Is that meant to link to level crossing rather than At-grade intersection?

Steelkamp (talk) 07:55, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This has definitely suffered from years of cruft accumulation with insufficient maintenance of the page. Will have a more thorough look this weekend but I think this will require major work to be maintained at GA status. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:53, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There has been no improvement to this article in the last month. I suggest to any uninvolved users passing by that you close this GAR as delist. Steelkamp (talk) 05:29, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.