Talk:Capitol Limited (B&O train)

Good Article Status Awarded

I have reviewed this article in accordance with the Good Article Criteria, and awarded it GA status. Well done to JGHowes (talk · contribs) for such excellent work here. Anthøny 12:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:B&O Capitol Limited combined.png

Image:B&O Capitol Limited combined.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

 Fixed JGHowes ^talk - 06:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:OP-2599.jpg

Image:OP-2599.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 15:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

 Fixed — FUR added March 15, 2008 JGHowes ^talk - 18:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

A-Class review

I've been asked to make a review of this article for A-Class status. While I will be reading and re-reading through this text in the next few days, I invite other editors to add their comments as well. The Trains WikiProject has not yet created its own guidelines for A-Class criteria, so I will be working mainly from the Featured article criteria as a benchmark. The WP Version 1.0 A-Class criteria are also helpful here.

1. It is—
   • (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard;

     Y - I don't see any obvious problems in the grammar, and the text is fairly straightforward without using excessive jargon. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

   • (b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details;

     N - I'd like to see more about the equipment that was used. Before the Pullmans were added after World War II, what kinds of cars were on the train? What was a typical consist of heavyweight cars and what was a typical consist toward the end of the service? Were the heavyweight to streamline rebuilds of the 1930s purely cosmetic or did the rebuilds include upgrades for the cars' operation (i.e. smoother, quieter, more efficient, more spacious)? According to John H. White in The American Railroad Passenger Car, B&O didn't start running domes until they were added to the Columbian in 1948, but in a quick scan of the images, the reader gets the impression that the domes were a long-standing feature of the service.

     There also is no mention of ridership figures in the article. Do we know if the train's clientele was primarily business or pleasure travelers? Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

   • (c) factually accurate: claims are verifiable against reliable sources, accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge, and are supported with specific evidence and external citations; this requires a "References" section in which sources are listed, complemented by inline citations where appropriate;

     Y - There is a good mix of reference material from different authors and reputable publishers that are independent of the article subject without a heavy reliance on online sources. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

   • (d) neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and

     Y - The article sticks to the facts; it does not appear to speculate on the reasons for any of the events listed or to overemphasize either positive or negative aspects of the subject. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

   • (e) stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process.

     Y - the last significant edits were in May, only one test edit/reversion since then. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
   • (a) a lead—a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;

     N - While there is a lead section, it is very short. When the article was featured on Portal:Trains as the selected article, additional detail had to be added from the text in order to make a sufficient abstract for the article. See Portal:Trains/Selected article/Week 49, 2007. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

   • (b) appropriate structure—a system of hierarchical headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents (see section help); and

     Y - yes, but it seems like the last paragraph of the History section should really be in the Equipment section. Once more information is added like the consist data mentioned above, additional or different headings may be needed to better outline the text. Also, would the schedule display be helped by using the route diagram templates (it seems like a toss-up to me at this point)? Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

   • (c) consistent citations—where required by Criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes[1] or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1) (see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references; for articles with footnotes, the meta:cite format is recommended).

     Y - the citations are in a consistent and easy to read format. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

3. Images. It has images and other media where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.

   Y - all the images that are included are either free images or appear to meet the fair use guidelines.

   However, one image lacks a caption and I'd like to see photos of the service from before the 1960s; are there any images available of the train's inauguration or first runs? Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

   N - The article seems short. It presents all of the information without going into excruciating details, but I read through it and was left wanting to read more about it. I think adding information like I mentioned above would be a good place to start. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

So, overall, I think this article is well-formatted and gives a good overview of the subject, but there is still more detail that I would like to see (as mentioned above) before it moves up the scale. Slambo (Speak) 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Slambo, for the comprehensive review identifying the areas needing further improvement. I agree completely with the points raised. This gives us a good working plan for the way forward. JGHowes ^talk - 13:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Capitol Limited (B&O train). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100201224707/http://www.njcu.edu/programs/jchistory/pages/c_pages/central_Railroad_of_New_Jersey.html to http://www.njcu.edu/programs/jchistory/Pages/C_Pages/Central_Railroad_of_New_Jersey.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Capitol Limited (B&O train)

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 • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:28, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

This 2007 promotion has a number of uncited passages, severe sandwiching throughout the article, and a lead of insufficient length to summarize the body of the article. I also question the relevance of the schedule table which seems like excessive and inappropriate detail to me. One might also expect some basic detail on Amtrak's version of the train; the current article says almost nothing about it. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I've axed the schedule table. I have no comment on the other points raised, which do seem valid. Epicgenius (talk) 23:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

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.