Talk:London Underground departmental stock

London Underground departmental stock has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 25, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

London Transport Low‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: Rapid transit / in UK / Locomotives Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
Sel	week 25, 2013

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Rapid transit.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

Assessment

Suitably referenced, with inline citations
Reasonable coverage - no obvious omissions or inaccuracies
Defined structure, with adequate lead
Reasonably well written for grammer and flow
Supporting materials - Infobox, images
Appropriately understandable

I have assessed the article against the criteria for B-class. The following needs to be addressed.

Lead does not adequately summarise the contents of the article. Done

I am therefore rating it at C-class for the moment. Bob1960evens (talk) 11:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All issues have been addressed, so I am rating it as B-class. Bob1960evens (talk) 11:54, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this article be list-class? Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 13:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure what this means ... Bob1960evens (talk) 16:04, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject London Transport/Assessment#Quality scale or Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Assessment#Quality scale (they're much the same). But to me, the article is not a list (a list would be something like List of London Transport locomotives), therefore the normal stub/start/c/b/ga/a/fa scale should be used. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with RedRose. Reading the article, however, it would be nice to have greater diversity of sources. Andrew³²⁷ 22:10, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought 5 separate sources was quite reasonable for an article about such a subject. Had you any other sources in mind? Bob1960evens (talk) 23:08, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]