Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways/Assessment



Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject UK Railways. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's UK Railways articles. The article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work. Feel free to help out by either helping with assessments or improving articles with a low quality rating.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the   project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:UK Railways articles by quality, which you can use to find articles which need work, as well as the table on the right of this page.

Frequently asked questions

 * How can I get my article rated? : Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
 * Who can assess articles? : Any member of the WikiProject UK Railways is free to add or change the rating of an article.
 * Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? : Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
 * What if I don't agree with a rating? : You can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it. Alternately, you can ask any member of the project to rate the article again.
 * Aren't the ratings subjective? : Yes, they are, but it's the best system we've been able to devise; if you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on this article's talk page.

Quality assessments
After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

Importance assessment
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the   project banner on its talk page:



The following values may be used for importance assessments:
 * Top - The article is about one of the core topics of UK Railways as listed in Train topics. Adds articles to Category:Top-importance UK Railways articles
 * High - The article is about the basic technologies and infrastructures or the most well-known or culturally or historically significant aspects of UK Railways. Adds articles to Category:High-importance UK Railways articles
 * Mid - The article is about a topic within UK Railways that is commonly known outside the UK Railways industry. Adds articles to Category:Mid-importance UK Railways articles
 * Low - The article is about a topic that is highly specialized within UK Railways and is not generally common knowledge outside the UK Railways industry. Adds articles to Category:Low-importance UK Railways articles

All articles that lack an importance rating are categorized in Category:Unknown-importance UK Railways articles.

Requesting an assessment
If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below.


 * SimSig Please consider as part of UK railways. It's a simulation of UK signalling so I think it's relevant... whether anybody else does I don't know! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.57.240.49 (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2009
 * Already assessed at C grade. Page has no recent updates, and does not need reassessing. Lord Castellan Creed (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * North Staffordshire Railway Needs a re-assessment. I have revised article with in-text citations and additional information NtheP (talk) 19:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC).
 * I've reassessed it as B-class/Mid, but it really needs a route diagram. Once you have a route diagram, you might like to consider WP:GAN. I've only given it a very cursory read; I've not checked grammar in depth, but I think it could make GA.Pyrotec (talk) 19:29, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

*Intercity 125. Unsigned comments by User:81.111.115.63, 16:07 18 May 2009. I beleive that it is, curretly, correctly assessed as a C-class mid/high importance article. It has the makings of a B-class article, but it currently lacks WP:verify in many of the sections. There is (also) a {flag} to that effect at the top of the article.Pyrotec (talk) 15:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Anglesey Central Railway - reassessed it as B class, possibly it needs some minor copyediting & has the makings of a GA.Pyrotec (talk) 20:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Eurostar - It is currently assessed for this project as B class; and I consider this to be a reasonably assessment. Possibly it needs some minor copyediting & has the makings of a GA, but some sections do not comply with WP:verify, so it will need some more work to get through WP:GAN.Pyrotec (talk) 14:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hereford Road Skew Bridge - I've worked on it alone all day and it needs someone else to look at it and a reassessment. Thanks. MegaPedant (talk) 03:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC) - Reassessed as C-class, Mid-importance. Nice work. Pyrotec (talk) 18:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Reading Southern railway station - major contributor is me, so I shouldn't allocate a class myself, so would anybody care to rate it? --Redrose64 (talk) 20:34, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Done, rated C-class mid importance with some comments left. Nice work so far. Simply south (talk) 21:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * British Rail Class 139 - Currently rated as Start-class low-importance. I don't believe either is accurate any more, but having contributed to the article shouldn't really reassess it myself. There's a lot more information on it now than when it was first rated, and the class is important as a new design which has received some coverage in the West Midlands area at least. Alzarian16 (talk) 13:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Reassessed as C-class, Mid-importance. Pyrotec (talk) 19:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Great Northern Route . Asessed it as Start class. There is a fair amount of detail, but much of it is unreferenced. With improved references, would be C-class. Pyrotec (talk) 19:13, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wye Valley Railway I've puts lots of work into this article over a long period of time and looking at other articles I think it is higher than a start-class. Last rated in September 2008. WVRMAD • Talk  • Guestbook   15:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Reassessed as C-class. It's not far off being a B-class: the text is fine; however using wikipedia as a verifiable reference is not allowed (its used twice) and you've got a fair amount of WP:Overlinking, i.e. not every occurence of Monmouth Troy railway station, for instance but there are quite a few others, needs wikilinking. Better references and less wikilinking would likely give you B-class. Pyrotec (talk) 15:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now B-class, removed unsutiable citations and lots of overlinking. WVRMAD • Talk  • Guestbook   17:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hitchin railway station, Arlesey railway station, Biggleswade railway station, Sandy railway station, St. Neots railway station, Huntingdon railway station - another user recently raised all these from Start (Hitchin, Arlesey) or Stub (others) to B. I then examined St. Neots, and decided to downgrade it to Start (my reasons are explained at its talk page). Please could somebody verify my decision, and also rate the other five? I believe they're better than Stub, but can't decide on Start or C. They're certainly not B, see WP:BCLASS. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I agree with you on St. Neots - its definitely not a B-class; and not yet a C-class, I agree with Start-class. Hitchin is just about a C-class, so I've downgraded it from B to C-class. Huntingdon is almost unreferenced, so I've downgraded it from B-class to Start; similarly, Biggleswade & Arlesey are not C-class, let alone B-class, so I've moved down them to Start-class. I've also changed the WP Bedford assessments, it appears to be a case of self-assessment by one of the main contributors. Pyrotec (talk) 16:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what happened here - I was sure there was only five station articles, but now there are six . I've also reassessed Sandy railway station as Start-class. On checking, it seems that the editor concerned only started contributing to wikpedia on 8 May 2010; and while the additional content added to all the articles has improved those articles - none are anywhere near B-class (or C-class in five out of six cases). Pyrotec (talk) 17:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Vale of Rheidol Railway - I have made a number of edits on this subject in recent weeks. Currently start class. Could someone have a look and see whether it would merit a higher grading?  Willsmith3  (Talk) 09:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Reassessed as B-Class, Mid importance Pintodog (talk) 12:31, 9 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Tywyn Wharf railway station, Pendre railway station, Rhydyronen railway station, Brynglas railway station, Dolgoch railway station, Abergynolwyn railway station – I have made many edits on these recently. Currently all are Stub/Start class. Could anyone give them higher ratings? WT79 The Engineer (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * All have been reassessed as C-Class. I wouldn't give them B-Class, due to an over-reliance on the 'Tallyllyn Handbook' for citations, using it at least 4-5 times in each article.