Talk:Shipyard Railway/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Marshelec (talk · contribs) 23:00, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I plan to commence a review of this article. Marshelec (talk) 23:00, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Prose
[edit]The prose is to a high standard. I offer the following suggestions for further improvement:
The lead
[edit]- In the lead, add "(an urban mass-transit company)" after Key System in the second sentence. When I first read the sentence, I initially guessed wrongly that the Key System might be some kind of technology. While the reader can click the link to learn about the Key System, I suggest that this small addition to the text in the lead is worthwhile.
Done Rephrased.
- Relocate the sentence in the lead beginning: "The line operated with ..." to be the 3rd sentence in the paragraph, for better flow.
Done
Route
[edit]- In the Route section, readers may not be familiar with the use of "jogged" in the second paragraph to describe a change in direction of a route. I recommend some alternative, perhaps: "turned left for two blocks...", or "turned west ...."
Done
- change "curved trestle" to "curved trestle bridge" and add wikilink to Trestle bridge, removing the same link from "trestle" in the History section.
Done
- Also in the second paragraph, I accept that "grade crossing" is common terminology in North America. However, there is an article Level crossing, and I recommend this term is used instead.
Not done Per WP:ENGVAR
- In the third paragraph under Route, replace "jogged" with "turned".
Done
History
[edit]- Under History, in the third sentence, replace "ran" with "run".
Done
- In the 4th sentence, provide the full expansion of IER, by relocation from the 2nd paragraph.
Done
Rolling stock
[edit]- In the second paragraph, change "refit" to "refitted"
Done
- In the second paragraph, change "married pairs" to "twin units (also known as married pairs)"
Not done Per ENGVAR
I will aim to cover other GA review criteria in the next couple of days. Marshelec (talk) 00:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Verifiable with no original research
[edit]- No issues found with references that I was able to check. Online citations are from reliable sources.
- No copyright violations identified.
Broad in its coverage
[edit]- Good coverage of the topic.
Neutral
[edit]- No issues.
Stable
[edit]- No issues.
Illustrated
[edit]- Images are all relevant, with suitable captions and are tagged with copyright status
This is a Pass. Marshelec (talk) 03:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)