Talk:Hitachi Rail Italy Driverless Metro/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 18:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: three found, two fixed. I could not find a replacement for the third.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 18:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   and automatic train supervisory. Should this be "automatic train supervision."? Or should it be Automatic train stop (ATS)?

   Line 5 is an under construction line of the Milan Metro, Italy, Please rephrase this is very clumsy.

   Again, Line C of the Rome Metro, Italy, is an under-construction 25.5 kilometers (15.8 mi) line "an under-construction 25.5 kilometers (15.8 mi) line" is not an English construct, perhaps "is a line under construction."

   The infobox header has MX3000. this is unexplained, shouldn't it be something like AnsaldoBreda Driverless Metro?

   Seems likes someone changed the infobox after the nomination. Otherwise I've fixed up accordingly (supervision is correct). Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   ref #12[2] is dead and not available at the Internet Archive.

   ref #15 - can we have an English translation of the article title, also publication details.

   Other references check out as far as my limited knowledge of Danish and Italian goes.

   I used Google Translate to read the Italian. Ref #15 contains the title (now also translated) the publisher/author and the year of publication, which makes up the complete publication information. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The three and four-car trains have six three-phase asynchronous motors, each giving a power output of 105 and 128 kilowatts (141 and 172 hp), giving each train a power output of 630 or 764 kilowatts (840 or 1,025 hp). The previous paragraph mentioned six car trains, are they in any way different?

   Only Rome has six-car trains, and I have not been able to identify any figures for this, including no detailed information at this level on the project page. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

   OK

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Some concerns have been raised on the talk page - have these been dealt with?

   I've replied, or the issue has been resolved somehow. Part of the comments are valid, parts are OR. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, on hold for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

   OK, thanks for addressing these concerns. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

   Thank you for taking the time to review the article. It should all be fixed now. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)