Talk:Pennsylvanian (train)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 11:34, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) The article's lead fails to adequately summarise the contents. I see a lot of mention of travel times and suburb passing throughs, but not much about history or equipment?
 * 2) "Sample consist" What is this?
 * 3) The second lead paragraph needs to be moved into the body

Please fix the above points, so that the article is GA compliant. Thank you.  ★ ★KING RETROLORD★ ★  08:44, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added a paragraph to the lede and spun off a new Finance section to address 1 and 3. As to 2, a train's consist is its equipment on a given day and time. The sample consist reinforces the equipment section with an actual example of the Pennsylvanians' equipment on that day. Best. Mackensen (talk) 12:30, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

More review

 * "1,435 mm (4 ft 8 1⁄2 in)" The measurements are the other way around every other time in the article?  ★ ★King∽~Retrolord★ ★  06:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Can you ref some of the unreffed stuff in the infobox please?  ★ ★King∽~Retrolord★ ★  06:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) Can you add one sentence to the lead discussing the "finances" section of the article?  ★ ★King∽~Retrolord★ ★  06:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.  ★ ★King∽~Retrolord★ ★  06:10, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

New reviewer
Retrolord has been indefinitely blocked, but I can finish this one up. I should have my comments posted in the next 3-7 days; sorry for the delay in your review. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I've read this through and made a few minor tweaks; feel free to revert any you disagree with. This is a solid, well-written article that's clearly ripe for promotion. I also made the slightly larger change of removing the "Finances" header to make this material a part of "history". It's not out of place there, and avoids the sort of very short subsection discouraged by WP:LAYOUT. Again, feel free to revert and we can discuss.

All else looks good so far. Now I'll go over the checklist and do a few spotchecks, but I suspect this is ready to promote. -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)