Talk:SR N Class

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article SR N Class has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
July 16, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
Trains Portal
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
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
Mid Importance: mid within UK Railways WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of the Locomotives task force.


To-do
list

Pending tasks for SR N Class:

 (purge cache –  edit this list)

Importance rating--Bulleid Pacific 19:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo

[edit] GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail:

I made quite a few minor formatting changes for WP:MOS, but my major concern here is the lack of wikilinking, just three outside of the lead. I think this isn't quite up to the standard of other recent locomotive articles, if the linkages could be improved to broaden the scope of interest. Hence, I'll put the review on hold until such a time my concern is addressed. Cheers! The Rambling Man 17:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your expedient attention to my review comments, hereby satisfied. GA awarded. The Rambling Man 18:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)