Talk:KiHa 183 series

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as being recently created, having no relevant page history and duplicating an existing English Wikipedia topic, because this has no overlap with the 183 series EMU, while this is about the KiHa 183 series DMU. And other articles with similar series numbers exist; see 283 series and KiHa 283 series. --MiasmaEternal^TALK 01:59, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree that a merge to 183 series wouldn't be useful, as they are different trains. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 09:48, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 02:35, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that if you took a certain KiHa 183 series train, you could travel in an animal's lap? Source

ALT1: ... that you could travel with animals on the Asahiyama Zoo KiHa 183 series service?

ALT2: ... that you could travel with stuffed animals on the Asahiyama Zoo KiHa 183 series train service?

• Reviewed: NA

Created by MiasmaEternal (talk). Self-nominated at 01:25, 15 July 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - Many paragraphs are unsourced.
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - The trains have animal-themed decour. The hook suggests that there are actual animals on the train.

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Cool-looking trains that would deserve a spotlight. No immediate evidence of plaigarism, although in that regard I am assuming good faith as all of the sources are in Japanese. A cursory look at what information I can find doesn't suggest that this article is a hoax. Currently there are many paragraphs which do not have sources. If the sources used in the article also provide the information that is in those unsourced paragraphs then the nomination could be made eligible. The hook is somewhat misleading regarding the contents of the article, although not enough that I would reject it out of hand. Not going to reject this as a reviewer who can read Japanese might be able to help this become eligible, and this appears to be the first nomination by the nominator, so WP:IAR may apply in helping this reach DYK. The merge request appears to be the result of a user mistaking this for a variant of an unrelated but similarly named multiple-unit. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 11:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Nominator here - I do agree with the sourcing issue (I'm working on that at the moment). As for the hook, I've added a modified version of the alternate hook above. MiasmaEternal^TALK 06:24, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

@MiasmaEternal: are you still working on the sourcing issue? A lot of the paragraphs on the page are still uncited, which has to be fixed before this review is completed. BuySomeApples (talk) 22:11, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey @BuySomeApples: I've been busy in real life, but I've managed to sort out the sourcing issue. MiasmaEternal^TALK 09:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that @MiasmaEternal: I can see you did a lot of work improving the page! The only problem is it looks like a few paragraphs still don't end with citations, so the last one or two sentences look uncited. Paragraphs and statements should be always cited even if the same citation was used for another part of the article. If you're using the same citation for a whole paragraph, it's usually best to put it at the end of the paragraph rather than the middle. BuySomeApples (talk) 23:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I've fixed the issue you mentioned, and I've noted it for future occasions. MiasmaEternal^TALK 08:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @MiasmaEternal:! Now that the sourcing has been fixed the article looks good (no copyvio, assuming good faith on Japanese language sources). It was new enough at the time of nomination and is long enough. The hooks are cited and interesting, but I agree with HumanBodyPiloter5 that they could be more precise (ALT0 is fine in my opinion). I'm striking ALT1 but I really like ALT2. The only problem is that there's no mention of "stuffed animals" in the article, this would have to be fixed to approve ALT2. It also might be nice if ALT2 mentioned that it was a train service somewhere in the hook (but not necessary!). BuySomeApples (talk) 05:53, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

I've fixed the hook. MiasmaEternal^TALK 01:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Amazing work @MiasmaEternal:! Thanks for doing so much to help get this nomination over the threshold. I think this nom looks pretty good now and all of the issues found in the original review have been resolved. Approving ALT0 and ALT1. BuySomeApples (talk) 01:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)