Wikipedia:Peer review/BC Rail/archive1
I've built this article up from a stub and am thinking of nominating it as a FAC. As I've been the only major contributor, I'd like to get some feedback on anything that I might have missed or anything that could improve the article before I do so (One thing I'm already aware of is that the article could use some more images; I'm working on that). Thanks in advance, JYolkowski // talk 23:09, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
- A few style things: there are quite a few short paragraphs (2-3 sentences) that should probably be merged into longer paragraphs; the map in the lead should probably be moved down a little since on a small monitor it makes the lead look all messed up. The Royal Hudson pops up alot in text, unless you're planning a seperate article on that train, you might want to consider having an expanded section on that train and its history in this article--nixie 01:08, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I've combined some of the paragraphs into larger ones. There's still a few three-sentence paragraphs out there but it's better than it was before. I've also moved the map down. I've previously written a fair bit about the Royal Hudson in Canadian Pacific Railway so I might spin some of that off into a new article later on this week. JYolkowski // talk 01:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
- And one week becomes two... but I finally got around to creating Royal Hudson. JYolkowski // talk 02:03, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I've combined some of the paragraphs into larger ones. There's still a few three-sentence paragraphs out there but it's better than it was before. I've also moved the map down. I've previously written a fair bit about the Royal Hudson in Canadian Pacific Railway so I might spin some of that off into a new article later on this week. JYolkowski // talk 01:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
- The article looks good to me. I can't think of anything to add. — RJH 17:04, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
- Looks good. But to pass FAC it will need inline citations. The inote/explain-inote system is the easiest to use. See the edit page of history of the Grand Canyon area for an example of this system in use. --mav 00:39, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
- Is this something new? Canadian Pacific Railway doesn't have inline citations and it passed okay. Anyway, I took a look at the article you mentioned and the citations don't look intrusive (which is my main concern) so I'll give that a go. JYolkowski // talk 01:46, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
- I've gone through with a copyedit, adding and correcting links, and some quick info on equipment dispositions. At the NMRA national convention in 2004, one of the tours I went on was to CEECO Rail Services where they were dismantling the BCR electrics. I'll look through my photos from the tour when I get home tonight, I think I've got one that could be used here. I've also got a PGE passenger timetable on my desk at home; I'll see if I can get a scan of it (does Kinko's do that?) and then see about adding some of the data within it to the article text this weekend. I think all of the important points about the railroad are covered in the text (at least I can't think of anything that was missed). I'd like to see some more photos of trains in regular service. On the inline citations, yeah, that's something that's coming up more often on the FAC page now; check out Wikipedia:Footnote for more info (I'm not so sure I like the proposal, but it's gaining support). slambo 13:45, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for the copyedit. If you had a picture of the ex-electrics, that would be excellent as well (at a personal level, I find the electric operation at Tumbler Ridge one of the more fascinating things in the railway's history). Thanks again, JYolkowski // talk 02:41, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
- I've found two suitable photos from the tour and added them to the article. The image placement isn't the greatest, but there they are. slambo 17:59, May 21, 2005 (UTC)
- Finally got a scan of that timetable cover uploaded and added to the appropriate section. Sorry it took so long, we finally got a scanner of our own today (so we've got yet another new toy to play with this week; if only it arrived on Friday). slambo 01:03, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
- No problem. Looks really good, well worth the wait. Thanks again! JYolkowski // talk 23:58, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for the copyedit. If you had a picture of the ex-electrics, that would be excellent as well (at a personal level, I find the electric operation at Tumbler Ridge one of the more fascinating things in the railway's history). Thanks again, JYolkowski // talk 02:41, 20 May 2005 (UTC)