Wikipedia:Peer review/Hastings Line/archive1

Hastings Line

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I want to get it to FA status! The article is currently a Good Article, and has been developed a little since achieving GA status. There is little that is not covered now, so time to reach for the top.

Thanks, Mjroots (talk) 20:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this.

Shouldn't the town be Royal Tunbridge Wells and only Tunbridge Wells pre-1909 or referring to the station?
- per WP:COMMONNAME, it's "Tunbridge Wells". The Royal bit is hardly ever used, certainly not on bus destination blinds, or the nameboards at the railway station. You might see it on a map, but that is about all. Mjroots (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Who granted Royal Assent?
The Queen - it's implied by the term itself (which is linked). See Royal Assent#United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:19, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Does this need to be expanded upon or not? Mjroots (talk) 18:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think just to give it historical context for those who don't know, it should say which monarch granted Assent. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Mjroots (talk) 09:02, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments from me (in no particular order):

In "Planned electrification" it states that British Rail Class 70 (electric) locos were built in 1937, though that article states they were built from 1941 onwards.
- Corrected, they were ordered in 1937. Mjroots (talk) 12:24, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the text (e.g. The first passenger carrying train comprising C1 stock to use the line was a railtour on 15 March. It was organised by the Southern Electric Group and ran from Paddington to Folkestone Harbour. The train was hauled by 50 025 Invincible.) is rather bitty, and doesn't flow very well. Combining some of the sentences would make this more readable.
- Done - rewritten. Mjroots (talk) 12:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In 1963, Frant, Stonegate, Wadhurst and Mountfield Halt were proposed to be closed under the Beeching Axe. These are open now, I believe. Were they closed and reopened, or reprieved? When and why in each case.
- As noted in the stations section, only Mountfield Halt closed. Not sure we really need to state the obvious, which would take many hours trawling through local newspaper archives. Mjroots (talk) 12:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The tunnels that are still double track: were they already wide enough for normal width stock, or were they widened?
- As stated in the Construction section, Bo-Peep tunnel was widened. AFAIK, both tunnels at Tunbridge Wells were just wide enough, although some measures had to be taken to ensure that the track did not move within the tunnels. Will re-read Beecroft and see if I can expand this a bit. Mjroots (talk) 12:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done Mjroots (talk) 15:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be clearer to add dates to the respective era section headers? I think this would be Steam era: 1845–1957, Diesel-electric era: 1957–1986 and Electric era: 1986-present. See Talyllyn Railway for an example of this format.
- Done Mjroots (talk) 12:27, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. — An optimist on the run! (logged on as Pek the Penguin) 07:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a ref for the claim that says that Tunbridge had no facing junction.
- Done Mjroots (talk) 09:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason why Tunbridge Wells was opened without a ceremony?
- Not reported by sources. Mjroots (talk) 09:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to the stations on the line, there should really be more to add about most of them beyond a number of one line sentences. For comprehensiveness, there should be more historical content about those ones with a couple of sentences (Frant, Etchingham, Battle).
- Not sure, I don't want the stations to dominate the article when they already have stations of their own. Mjroots (talk) 19:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You mention right at the end that Southeastern currently run the line. I'd have thought something like that should be in the lead which currently isn't.
- Done Mjroots (talk) 09:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There appears to be little mention of the historical operators of the line, you have the early ones when it was being built and Southeastern, but what about Connex South Eastern and South Eastern Trains for example.
- I could add in a bit about post-privatisation operations, but am worried about sourcing issues, unless this falls into WP:BLUE territory. Mjroots (talk) 09:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Having mulled this over, we really need an "operators" section. Line was operated by SER --> SECR --> SR --> BR(S) --> NSE --> CSE --> SET and now Southeastern. Mjroots (talk) 09:35, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - New section added and fully referenced. The C of E if you're happy with my comments re the stations, the I think we're done here. Mjroots (talk) 19:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - I think it looks good now. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Southeastern is linked twice in the body of text
- Not any more! Mjroots (talk) 09:17, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- If these issues are sorted as with those above, I think it has a good chance. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've finally had a chance to read this in more detail on a better computer, so a few more comments:

Tunnels table: I think the details should be written in complete sentences.
- Done Mjroots (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Diesel-electric era: The sentences reagrding the Cannon Street SB fire need references.
- @Optimist on the run: It is referenced - Beecroft pp38-40 (currently ref #97).
  - I don't have a copy of the source so can't verify, but I took that ref to refer to the sentence Hastings Diesels had almost completely replaced steam by June 1958, which seems unrelated to the fire. Optimist on the run (talk) 17:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've split the CS stuff into a separate paragraph. Should be clearer now. Mjroots (talk) 17:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do have Beecroft; the fire and initial introduction of the 6-S units is on p. 38, para 3; the June 1958 stuff is p. 40. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
...and the timings are p39 Mjroots (talk) 19:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Diesel-electric era: "wriggle out of the deal" - is there a more formal way of expressing this?
- Renege upon? Quoted per source though. Mjroots (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Accidents and incidents: This looks a little skewed to WP:RECENT. I'd suggest shortening the 2013 landslip incident (is there scope for a separate article for that?)

Optimist on the run (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- No mileage whatsoever in a separate article. Although there was disruption for a number of weeks, there were no injuries or deaths. Would not be able to fight an AfD if an article were created IMHO. Mjroots (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]