Talk:Maryland and Pennsylvania Railroad/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Maryland and Pennsylvania Railroad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * consistent conversion of all units; some are not converted
 * 2nd para of "19th-century predecessors": abbreviation as ft. Per MOS:NUM it should be ft (no period). It would, however, be preferable to match the style of the rest of the article and have foot spelled out, though.
 * In "20th century": if 1930–1931 a fiscal year, use a slash rather than a dash. Otherwise, use prose to connect the years, like and, if that's the meaning. Same issue for the other year range: use "1932 to 1935" instead.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Do you have a page number for note 1?
 * Do you have page numbers for the Hilton citation in note 4? (Also, don't link dates that are years only, like "1963" in this ref.) If these all come from different pages, I would expect unique notes for each page or page range.
 * Never seen the rp thing before. Alwayys nice to learn something new :) — Bellhalla (talk) 01:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 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):
 * The only issue I have is the images links were placed at the top of the article, which (on my machine, at least), makes all of the section "edit" links appear grouped together at the bottom of the article. If the images were placed in different sections, this would be avoided. Otherwise no other image issues.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * — Bellhalla (talk) 22:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * The only issue I have is the images links were placed at the top of the article, which (on my machine, at least), makes all of the section "edit" links appear grouped together at the bottom of the article. If the images were placed in different sections, this would be avoided. Otherwise no other image issues.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * — Bellhalla (talk) 22:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


 * ✅ Reply: Many thanks, Bellhalla, for your GAC review. As requested, I have added page numbers for the Hilton citation using the rp method, along with addressing the other issues. Please let me know if any items need further attention. Again, thanks.  JGHowes talk  -  21:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)