Talk:Pesa (rolling stock manufacturer)

PESA SA: TRANSLATION OF ARTICLE from POLISH WIKIPEDIA
On October 1, 2012, I TRANSLATED most of the article: Pojazdy Szynowe PESA Bydgoszcz http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pojazdy_Szynowe_PESA_Bydgoszcz   in Polish Wikipedia (pl.wikipedia), and posted this translatrion, REPLACING the very skimpy article in English Wikipedia (en.wikipedia).

The previous English article was very inadequate. The 'History' section was virtually non-existent, whereas the Polish article gives a detailed history of the plant, including the impacts of wars and political events in Poland.

This translation has been updated by adding details of orders secured by PESA aince 2001.

On September 19, 2012 PESA received a very large order from German Railways (Deutsche Bahn) having a potential value of $1.5 billion. This caused TRAFFIC STATISTICS for the PESA SA article in Wikipedia to rise to 555 daily from less than 20, and the TRAFFIC STATISTICS for the Pl.wikipedia.org article rose to about 1200 daily, from a daily average of 100 to 200.

The English article needed upgrading. The new article is greatly expanded. Prospero10 (talk) 17:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

B-class review: failed
This article fails B-class criteria, due to 1) insufficient references and 2) poor coverage/structure (it is mostly "history of", with little about company structure, impact, etc.). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 18:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Restoring mention of PESA's two largest contracts in Lead Section

I have restored the mention of PESA's two largest contracts ($460 million for 186 trams for Warsaw, the $1.5 billion framework contract with Deutsche Bahn) in the penultimate paragraph of the Lead Section. Without mention of these contracts, the final sentence of the Lead Section:

"PESA has become Poland's largest supplier of rail equipment, and a major export business"

becomes unsupported nonsense.

The argument has been made that this information is replicated later in the article. In fact, the entire list of contracts for Light rail vehicles is also replicated later in the article. Keeping the list of smaller contracts for LRV's in the Lead, but omitting the two biggest contracts, in my view makes no sense at all.

If the criterion is that the Lead Section should not contain anything foud later in the article, then the entire last two paragraphs, beginning with 'Since 2001 PESA has secured contracts to supply new Light rail vehicles.....' should be eliminated from the Lead Section.

Cutting out a summary of PESA's activities in building new rolling-stock sinced 2001 would not make the article more informative. It would make the article worse.Prospero10 (talk) 16:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)