Talk:Indian locomotive class WDG-4G

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Indian locomotive class WDG-4G/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ArnabSaha (talk · contribs) ❯❯❯ S A H A 15:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: PASS. (2nd opinion by Lee Vilenski)

Comments

• The lead needs expansion. At least 2 paras. In the 2nd para add about its specification, fleet etc.
• There are few issues with grammar and punctuation. Example- "GE has said that, during operations, real time real-time tracking will be undertaken for the locomotives with an aim to to increase productivity and minimize time duration." and "After winning the contract, General Electric started designing the locomotives which was were done by the Indian branch of GE Global Research in Bangalore."

"started designing... which were done"?? Really?! BTW, I am wondering - by any chance, was this change suggested by an automated grammar tool (just to be sure NOT to rely on this tool for grammar)? Also, I am not sure at all that "with an aim to" goes against "spelling and grammar are correct" (it looks more as a style issuechoice). Ipsign (talk) 09:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Ipsign, this is my first review and I am learning. so, pardon me if I have made any mistake. I check manually and also use tools to check spelling mistakes and all. ❯❯❯ S A H A 13:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

• Citations in the infobox and its info doesn't appear in the main prose. Add them under specifications.
• Sentences like "They will be used extensively for freight hauling and will replace the existing fleet of the ageing ALCo locomotives which have been the workhorse of IR for decades." in the lead seems pretty informal.
• The section "Locomotive shed" is not upto the mark of GA. It can be changed to "Fleet" and a prose can be added instead of the table.

I will do that, but when Suvadeep Saha56 comes after me, you have to be there. Field Marshal Aryan (talk) 10:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

• Omit duplicate links like the 5th and 7th citation.

Replies

ArnabSaha, check it now. I have implemented the changes you wanted. Let me know if any more is needed. Regards, Field Marshal Aryan (talk) 12:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Field Marshal Aryan, still there are some issues. abbreviations like UIC-1. citations aren't properly formatted. example- 14th citation. ❯❯❯ S A H A 14:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

ArnabSaha, Thanks for the suggestion. I will manually re-add all the citations.

PS. You might want to use   instead of space in your signature. (check in source mode if not visible) Field Marshal Aryan (talk) 05:36, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

ArnabSaha, I have updated the references. Please check it. Field Marshal Aryan (talk) 12:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

• I will go for a 2nd opinion, since this is my 1st review. ❯❯❯ S A H A 14:23, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

  ArnabSaha, No worries. Field Marshal Aryan (talk) 16:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:09, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that it took 190 litres (50 US gallons, 42 imperial gallons) of paint to complete the livery of the Indian locomotive class WDG-4G? Source: "The first locomotive rolled out of GE's Erie plant on 3 August 2017 with an orange and yellow livery that required 190 litres (50 US gal; 42 imp gal) of paint." (news source, anchor link from article)

Improved to Good Article status by Field Marshal Aryan (talk). Self-nominated at 08:48, 12 July 2020 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: epicgenius (talk) 14:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Indian locomotive class WDG-4G

• epicgenius: I've added an image for consideration. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

• @The Squirrel Conspiracy: Thanks. I think the image is suitable as well, and would actually help illustrate the hook. epicgenius (talk) 22:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot The Squirrel Conspiracy. It does make sense to show the livery when talking about it. Field Marshal (talk) 05:33, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• ROZA WDG4G.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)