Wikipedia:Peer review/SR Leader Class/archive1

SR Leader Class

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review as part of a drive to improve the article quality (use of English, etc.), and bring it to a standard where it may be submitted for FA review.

Thanks, Bulleid Pacific (talk) 15:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: As requested, here are my thoughts. Seems quite well done and close to FA standards, but there are some places that need to be made clearer to a non-steam locomotive enthusiast, or could have some context provided to the reader. Here are some suggestions for improvement. I enjoyed reading this - thanks and hope this review helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * SR in the title should be explained, as well as SR/ BR at the head of the infobox. Perhaps The design was started in 1946 to replace the aging M7 class locomotives still in operation on the Southern Railway (SR). The development of the design continued after the nationalisation of the railways in 1948 under the auspices of British Railways (BR).
 * The caption in the infobox is a bit obscure - perhaps Locomotive 36001 at Oxted, photo taken by British Railways. Unless the photo taken by BR has to be given, why not say something like Locomotive 36001 on a test run at Oxted in November 1949?
 * Second paragraph of the lead has no links - I would link "aging M7 class" in the lead to LSWR M7 class, probably could link the nationalisation of rails, others
 * Second paragraph also uses "locomotive(s)" five times in three sentences (and "motive" once). Engine (as tank engine) is used once, could it or other synonyms be used a bit more?
 * Third paragraph should link thermic siphon, bogie and some other terms. This paragraph also seems to say the innovations were the reason the class was discontinued, then two sentences later that inidfferent reports on performance and cost concerns led to them being scrapped. Which is it (needs to be clearer - imagine all contributed to the project's demise)
 * "Leader" is in double quotes everywhere except the lead sentence and the second image caption - should be consistent. Also most quotes use double quotes " but 'Cycling Lion' and However, the results of the trials as reported to British Railways headquarters at Marylebone were 'conspicuous by the absence of praise' .. use single quotes '
 * Missing word? resulting in a Southern Railway design brief [which?] called for a high-powered locomotive requiring little maintenance.[2]
 * Verb seems odd for a proposed locomotive in The brief also stipulated that the locomotive could be used on both passenger and freight trains... perhaps something like The brief also stipulated that the locomotive would be able to be used on both passenger and freight trains ... is clearer?
 * Link 0-4-4-0 in Background and [0-6-0]] in Design details
 * Provide context to the reader - so after "double-ended running" perhaps add a phrase like "so the locomotive could operate equally well in either direction" I am not super happy with my phrase, but you get the idea?
 * Link SR West Country and Battle of Britain Classes for "Bulleid Pacific" (I think) and tank engine in Design details.
 * Could there be a general diagram of the engine with the positions of the three cabs, boiler, bogies and perhaps other details shown? I would also move the second image up to this overall section as it seems much more useful here
 * Missing word? The valve gear used the unusual sleeve valve arrangement [and?] was tested on the ex-LB&SCR H1 class Hartland Point  or perhaps "that was also tested on"?
 * Awkward sentence The decision to include oscillating gear that added a 25-degree axial movement to the sleeves to avoid seizure by allowing even lubrication of moving parts was also based upon motoring practice.[14] not sure how to fix it
 * Per the MOS I think imperial gallons should be spelled out in and 4000 imp. gal (18,160 litres) of water
 * Last three sentences in "Boiler, firebox and smokebox design" section need a ref
 * I don't understand this The cab at the smokebox end of the locomotive suffered a similar issue to the fireman's cab, in that it was prone to heat. This resulted in the locomotive being used in 'reverse', ie. tender-first, to circumvent this problem.[28] WHy would running it in reverse help / solve the problem?
 * In "Livery and numbering" why isn't the second section called "British Railways" (as the first is "Southern Railway")?
 * Sources and refs seem fine to me, although I am not a rail expert.

Bulleid Pacific comments: Most of these issues have been addressed, although someone may wish to check the article again. I intend to add a couple more ex-British Railways images of various aspects of the locomotive when I have the time. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 01:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments from
 * You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC. The sourcing looks good.
 * Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 02:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Bulleid Pacific comments: Thank you. My next task is to get someone to have a second look at the prose, just to tie up any remaining issues missed by the last round of edits. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 23:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)