Talk:LSWR S15 class/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Glad to see this article back at GAN. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think "loading guage" in the second paragraph of the lead needs a word or two of explanation.

The information in Preservation needs to be cited.

"Seven examples have been preserved for use on heritage railways, and are currently in varying states of repair." As of 2009?

"The design was also to power other forms of traffic such as milk trains, which required fast transit to the dairies in London as perishables." This needs rewriting, not quite sure what it's trying to say.

"Robert Urie used the opportunity to develop his new H15 class design, therefore applying the 4-6-0 locomotive concept ...". Why "therefore"?

"Unlike the original Drummond cab that was perpetuated by Urie ..." Is "perpetuated" the right word here? Would something like "favoured" perhaps be better?

"The S15s outlasted the King Arthur class because of their dual freight/passenger abilities ...". Need to provide some context for this statement. Was the King Arthur class introduced at the same time as the S15, for instance?

"No.823–837 were delivered from Eastleigh during 1927 and 1928 and a further ten, No.838–847, were authorised in 1931." Shouldn't this be "Nos. 823–837 ..."?

That's it. I'm putting this article on hold to allow time for these few issues to be addressed. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken these comments on board, and have attempted to incorporate them into the text. Please post up any further observations that may help improve the article further.--Bulleid Pacific (talk) 20:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That'll do for me, I'm now listing this article as a GA. Thanks for responding so quickly. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:52, 15 February 2009 (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.