Talk:SR Class Q1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
SR Class Q1 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||
|
||||
 |
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list |
||||||
 GA |
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) | ||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance within the Trains WikiProject. | ||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
|
||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of the Locomotives task force. |
|
Pending tasks for SR Class Q1: |
(purge cache – edit this list) | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
||
| See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Todo | ||
 Archives |
| Archive 1, 2005 discussions |
[edit] No more Thomas the Tank Engine references, please.
Please do not place any further Thomas the Tank engine information on this article, as there is already enough information on that page, which one can reach via the link in this article. Please keep Wikipedia tidy! Cheers. --Bulleid Pacific 13:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA review comments
Here are my comments having reviewed the article for WP:GA status:
Follow WP:MOS for section headings, e.g. "The Design" should be "Design", (no "The"), "Livery and Numbering" should be "Livery and Numbering" (no over-capitalisation), "References/Footnotes" should probably be two sections, "References" and "Notes".Personal pref, wikilink Oliver Bulleid in the lead, he's significant.Personal pref, Second World War, not World War II (sounds like a movie sequel). Plus it's inconsistent between the lead and the opening paragraph of the Background section. Plus there's a World War I later on as well.NB. The World War I reference is regarding to Bulleid's earlier career in the army transportation service, where he rose in rank from Lieutenant to Major. I'll change to First World War.--Bulleid Pacific 11:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)- "
'Austerity'" or "austerity" or austerity, consistency needed.
*"This explains their (to many) bizarre appearance." - a bit original research for my liking. The austere approach to the design explains its functional appearance... something like that perhaps?
- "
(like Bulleid's "West Country/Battle of Britain" and "Merchant Navy" classes)" why in parentheses? Just use a pair of commas. Livery and numbering section has unnecessary subsections in my opinion, it breaks the prose up too much. I think you could merge all the sections.Merged Southern sections to build up section with better prose, though section does need to be split for ease of reference as regards livery and time periods involved.--Bulleid Pacific 11:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Placement of 33038 is awkward (on my browser at least), perhaps if the livery & numbering section is reworked into a single section, the image could be placed at the top on the right and would look better.Ok, I've moved it further up, though it portrays the loco in Nationalised livery, and so it needs to stick with that section. I think it loos better where it is now. What do you think?--Bulleid Pacific 11:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)You need a reference for the Locomotive in fiction claim.
I think these issues can be easily resolved so I'll put the GA on hold in order to allow time for them. By all means ignore the personal preferences, they're just suggestions, but do try to be consistent whatever you choose. The Rambling Man 11:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Done remedial work. See my own notes for my own reasons on some of the changes.--Bulleid Pacific 11:33, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
