Jump to content

Talk:209 series/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 19:54, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Starts GA Review. The review will follow the same sections of the Article. Thank you --Whiteguru (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 


Observations

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
   HTML document size: 285 kB
   Prose size (including all HTML code): 24 kB
   References (including all HTML code): 51 kB
   Wiki text: 75 kB
   Prose size (text only): 16 kB (2619 words) "readable prose size"
   References (text only): 6644 B
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  • The Variants section is well laid out and easy to follow;
  • The leading infobox on the 209-0 series sets out basic configuration of these EMU sets. Subsequent infoboxes should list variations from this first delivery or be disposed of if there are no significant variations.
  • File:JRE 209-Naha1.jpg under the 209-0 infobox is superfluous as there is already an illustration of this series of EMU in the infobox.
  • The infobox on 209-950 series is superfluous given the brevity of this section and the links to the main article for E231 series § E231-900 series. Remove the infobox.
  • The image of the original 209-1000 series Jōban Line livery set under the 209-1000 series infobox can be moved across to the gallery
  • File:209kei 2000.JPG under the 209-2000/2100 series infobox can be moved across to the gallery
  • Move File:TWR 70-050 Osaki 20021228 (1).JPG under 209-3100 series infobox to the left and place it in a gallery
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  • References are laid out correctly.
  • Copyvio check run. Violation Unlikely → 0.0%
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  • Broad coverage of each variation of the JR East 209 series EMU, allocation to services and depots.
  • Articles like this can be subject to "rivet counting" and it appears same with multiple infoboxes.
  • Not all infoboxes show traction information and there are no link to the IGBT-VVVF traction system.
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  • Neutal point of view is presented in this article.
  1. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  • Page created 22 October 2006
  • Page has 562 edits by 150 editors
  • Page has 34 reverts in history
  • 90 day page views = 3390 views with a daily average of 37 views
  • ClueBot NG has been on the page 5 times indicating a very low level of mischielf
  • Page history is considered stable.
  1. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  • Page has 29 images.
  • All images examined for fair use rationales and appropriate text
  • KuHa 209-3003 of set 63 showing transverse seating bay added experimentally in 2004 is not a good image. It is difficult to see the transverse bay seating due the dark window pane. Suggest remove this image.
  1. Overall:
  • This is a long page with sections on each variant of the JR 209 EMU sets delivered to traffic.
  • The multiple infoboxes make this a long page. However, information is both basic and different with each 209 variant.
  • Layout suggestions have been made. --Whiteguru (talk) 04:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 

Legitimate concerns raised in the review; no improvements made; Matters raised in the review were not addressed. These matters will remain valid until the next GA Review, whereupon they must be addressed first. --Whiteguru (talk) 03:55, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]