Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Great Northern, Piccadilly and Brompton Railway/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 16:40, 2 June 2009.

Great Northern, Piccadilly and Brompton Railway

 * Nominator(s): DavidCane (talk) 22:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I am re-nominating this for featured article. It's a companion piece to two of my existing featured articles on the early history of London's tube lines. It was previously nominated in April, but the nomination was closed unsuccessfully due, I believe, to lack of support. I believe that all previous issues raised were addressed. Images are either self-created, uploaded as attribution sharealike from Flickr or PD due to age. --DavidCane (talk) 22:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Support – supported last time and see no reason to change my opinion. – iride  scent   19:21, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * http://www.davros.org/rail/culg/ .. I know we've discussed this before. Mind rehashing the arguments why it satisfies WP:SPS for the other reviewers?
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:42, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The CULG site gives a comprehensive list of its published sources here plus other, more general, sources here (under sources). I have a number of the books listed in the bibliography (using two of them myself as sources for the article) and have crossed-checked information listed on the site against these without discovering any discrepancies, so it seems fair to conclude that other information is also properly sourced. The information for which the web site is cited in the article is:
 * the length of line in the original form and current condition. I have confirmed these are accurate by:
 * measuring the route on a map
 * checking against distances between stations quoted in chains on a Railway Clearing House map
 * the number of lifts at certain stations - which matches the observable facts.
 * --DavidCane (talk) 03:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support: An important article in the history of London's transport system, around which topic a decent series of articles is in the making. My one reservation, fully aired at the last FAC, concerned the legibility of some of the text in the charts. This still niggles – but not enough to prevent me supporting. Brianboulton (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Image review: no issues with the images. They are verifiably either self-created (and appropriately licensed) or in the public domain. Jappalang (talk) 22:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support I share Brianboulton's concern about legibility, but no serious issues other than one (unactionable) abomination - the name change of Gillespie Road station, which surely should be reversed now? ;) jimfbleak (talk) 16:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Still where the away fans for Arsenal FC get off, so keeping the name's at least defensible (since they'll be the ones least likely to look on the map, think "ah, Finsbury Park looks closer", and get hopelessly lost. – iride  scent  19:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support, (but with a query, following). Beautifully written, and an interesting and detailed history. This is the first time I have contributed to a FAC review, so I apologise if I'm off base at all. I have a general query about the decision when to provide an inline citation. The referencing appears excellent, but from time to time there is a sentence that contains a substantive fact that does not have an in-line cite. The one that particularly attracted my attention was this: "However, competition from numerous small bus companies during the early 1920s eroded the profitability of the LGOC and had a negative impact on the profitability of the whole UERL group." Is the lack of a cite tag on this sentence because the next tag (which occurs part way through the next para in this case) includes this fact? I have wrestled with this issue with some GA candidates, too. My concern is that a reviewer cannot tell, without going to the source material, whether they should assume a later citation covers a fact in the current sentence, or whether there is actually a problem with a fact not being supported by any ref at all. If the citation in the following para does also cover this fact about bus competition, my comment would be that the reliance of several consecutive sentences on a single cite should not extend across paras. I hope my query makes sense. Any guidance or response? Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.