Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article has some uncited passages throughout the article. The "Current fleet" has an "update needed" orange banner from October 2022 and its prose might be counter to MOS:CURRENCY. Z1720 (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• On uncited passages: It doesn't look that bad at the moment. Can you tag stuff you think is problematic with citation needed?
• On "update needed": This issue is unimportant and not a reason to remove GA status. A top-level Wikipedia article on a topic like this is WP:NOT a railfan current fleet update, but rather a historical overview of the 100+ year history. Detailed information on the past few years would not be required even at the featured level. New_York_City_Subway#Rolling_stock stops in 2019 too and is a GA. (I suppose the update banner is a mild warning sign, but only in that it implies there weren't maintainers to simply remove such a banner.) SnowFire (talk) 22:14, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Z1720: - Just making sure you saw the above. Is there anything you think needs better citing? SnowFire (talk) 14:38, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @SnowFire: I added "citation needed" tags to places that need citations. I also suggest that the one-sentence paragraphs in "In popular culture" be merged together. Z1720 (talk) 15:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Unfortunately, I don't think I have time to address this like I'd have preferred, especially because some of the topics seem to be looking for "confirmation nothing is happening" (i.e. that these planned lines are on the books, but they aren't actually being built currently). Anyone else want to volunteer to take a look at fixing these? Otherwise, might have to delist after all. SnowFire (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]