Talk:OS MX3000

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:MX3000/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 14:25, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Initial review

This article appears to be at or about the right level for a GA. I will now check the article in more detail.

• History-

• 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence: I'm not convinced that in-line citation 5 verifies this statement.

• Specifications -

• Is this referring to direct current at the motor's it seems more like AC to me?

• Each car is equipped with four three-phase asynchronous 140-kilowatt (190 hp) motors, giving each three-car unit a power output of 1,680 kilowatts (2,250 hp). In each car, the four motors are fed by the car's own insulated-gate bipolar transistor. They transform the 750 volt direct current collected from the third rail shoe to the three-phase direct current used in the motors. The frequency and amplitude of the current fed to the engines varies depending on the train's speed.

• In the final paragraph of this section, are the driver and the engineer the same? I'm not sure whether it is one person or two people.

References, I'm not convinced that this article provides adequate English-language citations to verify the claims made. Most of the citations are based on the use of Norwegian newspaper articles (in Norwegian); however the manufacturer of the MX3000 is not a Norwegian company and it provides information in both German and English. I have added two English-language links, one on metros and one an the MX 3000. Pyrotec (talk) 13:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to do a thorough review. Concerning ref 5, it states: "Den gamle vognparken bestod av 207 vogner.", that translates: "The old fleet of units consisted of 207 cars." On second thought, I believe that includes the twelve T2000 cars, bringing the T1000 and T1300 total down to 195. The AC/DC remark is correct—when has DC even been three-phase? I have inserted the two English-language Siemens references where suitable as a supplement to the Norweigan ones. Teknisk Ukeblad is a weekly magazine for engineers and a highly reliable source, while På Sporet is a high-quality member magazine for the Norwegian Railway Club (with most authors having previously published books or working in the rail industry). Mainstream newspapers have been used to cover the "political" part of the article, such as when new orders have been made and other complications to the process. Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Woops, I checked some words with my Norsk-Engelsk/Engelsk-Norsk dictionary, but I missed that sentence. Thanks.Pyrotec (talk) 14:53, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   The addition of more English-language citations is desirable.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the article, I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 14:53, 16 May 2009 (UTC)