Talk:Autorack
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Autorack was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Delisted version: January 19, 2007 |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance within the Trains WikiProject. |
|
Pending tasks for Autorack: |
(purge cache – edit this list) | |
|---|---|---|
|
||
| See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo | ||
UPDATE: autorack articles has been consolidated from auto carrier under this heading, and internal links in a number of related articles have been updated. Vaoverland 04:52, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. LuciferMorgan 00:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Reasons for GA Delisting
This article's GA status has been revoked because it fails criterion 2. b. of 'What is a Good Article?', which states;
-
- (b) the citation of its sources using inline citations is required (this criterion is disputed by editors on Physics and Mathematics pages who have proposed a subject-specific guideline on citation, as well as some other editors — see talk page).
LuciferMorgan 04:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Use of italics
There are several examples of both and and being italicized in a sentence, making it appear that it came from advertising. Both and and should be italicized only if they are connected what would appear to be opposing comments and qualities—in short, rarely.
Hypothetical examples follow:
Bad: The cars are both safe and quiet.
Good: They are both lighter and stronger than their predecessors.
(Better still: They are lighter yet stronger than their predecessors.)
66.234.220.195 (talk) 04:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
