Login
Login

Talk:Texas and Pacific 610/GA1

GA Review

{{atopg

| status =

| result = Passed. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:51, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

}}

{{Good article tools}}

{{al|{{#titleparts:Texas and Pacific 610/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:Texas and Pacific 610/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: {{User|Someone who likes train writing}} 20:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 20:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article using the template below. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask them here. —Ganesha811 (talk) 20:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

:This article now meets the GA criteria! Congratulations to {{u|Someone who likes train writing}} and any other editors who may have worked on it. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

class="wikitable" style="text-align:left"
style="vertical-align:top;"

! width="30" | Rate

! width="300"| Attribute

! | Review Comment

style="vertical-align:top;"

| colspan="3" | 1. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1}}:

{{GATable/item|1a|y|

}}

  • {{tq|The A-1 was tested on the T&P's future parent company, the Missouri Pacific (MoPac)}} what does this mean? Does it mean it was tested on track belonging to MoPac? Clarify
  • As is my usual practice, I've made smaller prose tweaks myself to save us both time. If there are any you object to, just let me know. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Pass, well-written in general.

{{GATable/item|1b|y|

}}

  • Pass, no major issues. The external links are ok - probably not the best sources, but fine for reliability for EL.
style="vertical-align:top;"

| colspan="3" | 2. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2}}:

{{GATable/item|2a|y|

}}

  • No unreferenced passages, generally well cited.

{{GATable/item|2b|y|

}}

  • Generally reliable newspaper sources and hobbyist magazines. No obscure web sources that I can see. Hold for spot-check of 5-6 to ensure sources are being quoted accurately / described adequately.
  • No issues found, pass.

{{GATable/item|2c|y|

}}

  • None detected. Pass.

{{GATable/item|2d|y|

}}

  • Earwig finds nothing of concern, hold for manual spot check.
  • No issues found, pass.
style="vertical-align:top;"

| colspan="3" | 3. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3}}:

{{GATable/item|3a|y|

}}

  • Not able to find anything else of note.

{{GATable/item|3b|y|

}}

  • I was concerned it would be overdetailed, but in general it's readable. Is there more detail than I would have put? Probably, but for a railfan there's probably too little and for the general reader it's fine.

{{GATable/item|4|y|

}}

  • No issues of neutrality. Pass.

{{GATable/item|5|y|

}}

  • No issues here. Pass.
style="vertical-align:top;"

| colspan="3" | 6. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6}}:

{{GATable/item|6a|y|

}}

  • I'm not really convinced that the postcard image (File:Southern 610 (postcard).jpg) is in the public domain. If it was first published in "Audio-Visual Designs", do you have a link to the page or scan showing it was published without a copyright notice? The postcard publication wouldn't matter if it came second.
  • Not sure why the discussion below on this topic was removed, but based on that I think it's fine and copyright-free. Pass.

{{GATable/item|6b|y|

}}

  • Existing images are good, but a little sparse - 1-2 more would be great to have if available. I understand if no other relevant freely licensed images can be found, though.

{{GATable/item|7|y|

}}

{{abot}}