Talk:Valigonda train wreck

India: Railways Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indian railways (assessed as Mid-importance).

Trains Low‑importance

Trains Portal

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.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 20:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suitability of "Preventative measures" section?

The "Preventative measures" seems to be rather unsuited to the article - it doesn't relate to any official reports, and therefore is speculating as to what measures could have been taken. It then goes on to start talking about caution in high wind and snow! If an accident report had anything notable to say about the accident, I wouldn't mind this being mentioned in the article - but as it stands it is just speculation, and I would remove it - do others agree?

--92.26.184.137 (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]