Wikipedia:Peer review/TGV/archive1

TGV

Maybe too technical? Not enough book references?

Looks good—not too technical at all; I'd be surprised if references can't be solely Internet ones. Good pics. I'll run through it some time soon. Tony 13:14, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An excellent article that is quite approachable and is not too technical at all. You'll probably get dinged for lack of references and the bulleted lists. Reviewers usually prefer that you replace the later with normal prose, which usually isn't too difficult. I did get to ride on the TGV a couple of times; very nice, amazingly quiet, and quite smooth. There is (or, at least, was at the time) a track guage difference between France and Spain, so at the border crossing they had a stop where they adjusted the wheel spacing on the cars. — RJH 15:00, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The gauge difference exists for "normal" speed trains. The high speed trains in Spain use the same gauge as in France. David.Monniaux 17:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay. Well it's been a while so my memory was a little fuzzy. ;-) — RJH
Bullet points scrapped. A couple of references added - TGVweb is quite extensive. Willkm 23:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I like it. Nice job. Fsiler 10:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's good, but there's still work to be done before I would support it as an FAC:
- I've gone through a couple sections with a copyedit, adding unit conversions and   characters between the measurements and their units. There is probably more that could be done in this regard, and I'll work on this part more as I have time.
- The History section is too short compared to the infrastructure detail. Compare the history section here with the design and construction section of Pioneer Zephyr for an idea of what I'm thinking about.
  - Added some content to the History section. Willkm 23:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- There are far too few references for an article of this length. With a train type as famous as this, I would think that print references would be a requirement. I'll see what I've got in my own library this week.
- The lead section does not adequately summarize the entire article. With an article this long, I would expect the lead to be three paragraphs, with more detail on the background, history, construction and infrastructure all in the lead.
  - Added some content to the lead section Willkm 23:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'll probably find a few more things that I can help out with as I go through it more. slambo 15:20, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone through it with a copyedit, moved the pictures so they more closely relate to the text that borders them and added the comparison table. I've also started the Criticisms section with information about the protest in Milan earlier this week. There have got to be more criticisms than that over the system's 40 year history, and it needs to be expanded before we try for featured status. Also, with the Track and Rolling stock sections as big as they are, I wonder if we should split them out into a subarticle (such as TGV infrastructure, and keep summary information from it here) and place more emphasis here on the history and politics of the service. slambo 20:52, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion regarding moving the article to one of it's full name and using the acronym as a disambiguation page...thanks bcatt 12:25, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- TGV is its full name, with its origins in an acronym. Please see the comments I've added to the discussion page Willkm 23:57, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]