Talk:SR Q class/GA1

GA Reassessment

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

I have only one concern about this article, which I hope can be easily addressed within the hold period.

Where books or journals are being used as references, the relevant pages should also be given. At present, page numbers are given for some, but not for others.

It's often easier to separate the References into Notes and Bibliography, to make it easier to provide references to different pages in the same book.

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 00:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an author name for the Railway Magazine article? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 01:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, as its an editorial team report, and no one individual has claimed responsibility for it.--Bulleid Pacific (talk) 11:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's fine then. Thanks for addressing these points. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]