 | Southern Railway zone was nominated as a Engineering and technology good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 4, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Comment edit
The quality of the article to be very much improved with more satistical data.
Map edit
The article would be improved by the addition of a map showing the rail lines in zone 7. --Bejnar (talk) 22:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Timeline and key events edit
There is a section for timeline and key events. I am not sure if all of these need to be categorized as key events. I think removing it would be a good idea, need someone to check it out. --LokeshRavindranathan 11:31, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Manmadurai-Rameswaram Rail Track To Become 1st Green Corridor edit
Could this news item be mentioned either in this article or a new one about the Manmadurai-Rameswaram rail line? Manmadurai-Rameswaram Rail Track To Become 1st Green Corridor http://www.ndtv.com/tamil-nadu-news/manmadurai-rameswaram-rail-track-to-become-1st-green-corridor-1404068 Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:44, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
GA Review edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Southern Railway zone/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 03:37, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
There are many unreliable sources. FIBIS is a wiki, i.e. WP:UGC. indiarailinfo.com looks like some kind of railfan hobby site, i.e. also UGC. At the bottom of the page is says, "YOU are responsible for independently confirming the validity of information through other sources." which doesn't sound like a WP:RS to me. IRFCA is also a railfan site which describes itself as "a web-based forum". If it was just one or two references, it might be possible to sort that out during the course of a review but it looks like fully one third of the references fall into this category. This is contrary to WP:GACR 2b: "reliable sources".
From a stylistic point of view, I'm concerned about the heavy use of tables. They make up about half the total content of the article, which is contrary to WP:GACR 1b: "it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for ... list incorporation."
Either of the above is probably sufficient to invoke WP:GAFAIL item 1: "It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria" by itself. Between the two, there's no question. My apologies if this sounds harsh, but I wanted to make it clear what issues need to be resolved before this can be resubmitted for another review. RoySmith (talk) 03:37, 4 January 2024 (UTC)