Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Indian Railways/archive1

Indian Railways
Last week's Indian Collaboration of the Week. I learnt a lot about the Indian Railways while writing this article. Thanks to all the people who helped. The first of my two (maybe three) part series... =Nichalp  «Talk»=  18:24, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Thanks to Nichalp for leading the charge on this one. What a metamorphosis!  I've helped out with copyedits and link fixes, but not much more.  slambo 18:37, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, looks quite comprehensive to me, not rather Railways of India ? Phoenix2 18:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I now see that Indian Railways is a company, not an overview of railways in India. Phoenix2 18:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Support on condition someone goes through and removes the annoying definite articles (thes) before Indian Railways. Dunc|&#9786; 19:24, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Done =Nichalp   «Talk»=  08:25, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)


 * Support (it is also worth mentioning that the article was on WP:PR for a short while and was WP:COTW ages ago). But, as discussed in Talk:Indian Railways, should the chunk of the article currently at Rail transport in India be incorporated here too?  -- ALoan (Talk) 23:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * By merging the two sections the article becomes too long. In this way we can move the technical details to another page and expand that further. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  07:08, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * The discussion on the talk page was to split the article into Indian Railways and Rail transport in India, not to merge them. slambo 10:47, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * And then there was some about putting them back together again! -- ALoan (Talk) 11:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Support a fascinating article that covers its vast subject admirably well. Lisiate 03:51, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Well written article with plenty of pictures and very good prose. Sam Vimes 11:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support A well written article and I learnt a lot about Indian Railways. -- 03:43, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, looks good, it appears that the points I mentioned in PR have been addressed. JYolkowski // talk 20:05, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)