Talk:SR Q1 class/GA1

GA review comments
Here are my comments having reviewed the article for WP:GA status: *"This explains their (to many) bizarre appearance." - a bit original research for my liking. The austere approach to the design explains its functional appearance... something like that perhaps? I think these issues can be easily resolved so I'll put the GA on hold in order to allow time for them. By all means ignore the personal preferences, they're just suggestions, but do try to be consistent whatever you choose. The Rambling Man 11:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Follow WP:MOS for section headings, e.g. "The Design" should be "Design", (no "The"), "Livery and Numbering" should be "Livery and Numbering" (no over-capitalisation), "References/Footnotes" should probably be two sections, "References" and "Notes".
 * Personal pref, wikilink Oliver Bulleid in the lead, he's significant.
 * Personal pref, Second World War, not World War II (sounds like a movie sequel). Plus it's inconsistent between the lead and the opening paragraph of the Background section.  Plus there's a World War I later on as well.  NB. The World War I reference is regarding to Bulleid's earlier career in the army transportation service, where he rose in rank from Lieutenant to Major.  I'll change to First World War.--Bulleid Pacific 11:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * " 'Austerity'" or "austerity" or austerity, consistency needed.
 * " (like Bulleid's "West Country/Battle of Britain" and "Merchant Navy" classes)" why in parentheses? Just use a pair of commas.
 * Livery and numbering section has unnecessary subsections in my opinion, it breaks the prose up too much. I think you could merge all the sections.  Merged Southern sections to build up section with better prose, though section does need to be split for ease of reference as regards livery and time periods involved.--Bulleid Pacific 11:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Placement of 33038 is awkward (on my browser at least), perhaps if the livery & numbering section is reworked into a single section, the image could be placed at the top on the right and would look better.  Ok, I've moved it further up, though it portrays the loco in Nationalised livery, and so it needs to stick with that section.  I think it loos better where it is now.  What do you think?--Bulleid Pacific 11:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You need a reference for the Locomotive in fiction claim.

Done remedial work. See my own notes for my own reasons on some of the changes.--Bulleid Pacific 11:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)