Talk:Hitachi Rail Italy Driverless Metro/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 18:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: three found, two fixed. I could not find a replacement for the third. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * and automatic train supervisory. Should this be "automatic train supervision."? Or should it be Automatic train stop (ATS)?
 * Line 5 is an under construction line of the Milan Metro, Italy,  Please rephrase this is very clumsy.
 * Again, Line C of the Rome Metro, Italy, is an under-construction 25.5 kilometers (15.8 mi) line "an under-construction 25.5 kilometers (15.8 mi) line" is not an English construct, perhaps "is a line under construction."
 * The infobox header has MX3000. this is unexplained, shouldn't it be something like AnsaldoBreda Driverless Metro?
 * Seems likes someone changed the infobox after the nomination. Otherwise I've fixed up accordingly (supervision is correct). Arsenikk (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * ref #12 is dead and not available at the Internet Archive.
 * ref #15 - can we have an English translation of the article title, also publication details.
 * Other references check out as far as my limited knowledge of Danish and Italian goes.
 * I used Google Translate to read the Italian. Ref #15 contains the title (now also translated) the publisher/author and the year of publication, which makes up the complete publication information. Arsenikk  (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The three and four-car trains have six three-phase asynchronous motors, each giving a power output of 105 and 128 kilowatts (141 and 172 hp), giving each train a power output of 630 or 764 kilowatts (840 or 1,025 hp).  The previous paragraph mentioned six car trains, are they in any way different?
 * Only Rome has six-car trains, and I have not been able to identify any figures for this, including no detailed information at this level on the project page. Arsenikk (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Some concerns have been raised on the talk page - have these been dealt with?
 * I've replied, or the issue has been resolved somehow. Part of the comments are valid, parts are OR. Arsenikk (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, on hold for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for addressing these concerns. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to review the article. It should all be fixed now. Arsenikk (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for addressing these concerns. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to review the article. It should all be fixed now. Arsenikk (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to review the article. It should all be fixed now. Arsenikk (talk)  22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)