Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rail transport in India

Rail transport in India

This is part 2 of my railway series. This article discusses technical workings and nomenclature of railways in India. Suggestions welcome. =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:53, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

• Comment it looks good, but in general articles should not have long lists in the middle. I feel the article would be improved if the information on the classification system was moved to a separate page. - SimonP 15:19, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I'll try and work them into prose. I'm taking it that you only mean the passenger and freight sections are in the list form? =Nichalp «Talk»= 19:19, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the list part as I don't think it would be suitable to merge as prose. =Nichalp «Talk»= June 28, 2005 06:41 (UTC)

Support, that is exactly what I meant. The article is much more readable now that the list has been removed. - SimonP June 28, 2005 16:12 (UTC)

• Support. The delicate separation from Indian Railways has been handled very well. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) June 28, 2005 09:33 (UTC)
• support. Article very informative, but way too long (gave me sleepy eyes towards the end), and also it doesnt mention Indian train tragedies, mostly of which were because of drivers trying to avoid animals. Otherwise, very worth reading, good article. Antonio Moon Martin June 28, 2005 10:01 (UTC)

We usually describe a long article in FAC if it exceeds 32 kb. This article is little under 30KB. The accidents are mentioned in Indian Railways, the sister article. The lines between the two are blurred, I agree. Hope you can fully support it now. =Nichalp «Talk»= June 29, 2005 07:11 (UTC)

Cool. Understood now. Thanks for the explanation and God bless you! Antonio Choo Choo! Martin

• Support This is what the Rail transport in REGION article series should strive for. slambo June 29, 2005 16:51 (UTC)
• Object. There are license problems with a number of images:
  1. Image:Indian Railways Map.gif does not have a copyright tag.
  2. Image:Indianrailways-stamp.jpg has a license that is only compatible with use in an article on stamps.
  3. Image:Mauq.png and Image:Macl.png are under the Creative Commons {{cc-nc}} license, which is not acceptable for Wikipedia.
  4. Image:Bholu.png is tagged as a logo, but it doesn't look like one to me. It's probably fair use, but try for a more accurate tag.
• (Note that I'll be out of town until Tuesday, and probably won't be able to access Wikipedia until then) --Carnildo 1 July 2005 05:51 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments: 1) I've replaced the map with a free one I have made. The map was earlier tagged as PD. I think it may still qualify as a PD, but I have to verify it before reuse. 2) I've emailed the Indiapost site asking them for a licence to reprduce the image. I've removed the image till permission can be obtained. 3) The Maq & Macl images now sport a new licence, modelled on the same lines of the Argencia Brasil tag. They have given us permission, and can be verified independantly by emailing the webmaster. 4) I looked around for another tag, but on the mascot page, the only image there is under fair use. Since this the logo tag is also a fair use tag, wouldn't it be better to stick around with the logo tag? =Nichalp «Talk»= July 1, 2005 08:16 (UTC)

Fair use is something that needs to be determined on a case-by-case basis. The "fair use" variant tags are there to cover certain common cases. Using the "logo" tag on something that isn't a logo is no more correct than using the "GFDL" or "Crown Copyright" tags. Instead, it should have a generic "fair use" tag, with an additional comment as to why our use of the image is fair use. --Carnildo 6 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)

• Support. JYolkowski // talk 19:43, 3 July 2005 (UTC)