Hooghalen train crash 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. Review: August 25, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: I'm thrilled to share the exciting news that your article has met all of Wikipedia's guidelines!
After a careful review, I'm happy to say that it's good to go. Great job! Wishing you and your family an absolutely fantastic day ahead!
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:57, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Kj cheetham ( talk · contribs) 13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Starting review, may be a few days. -
Kj cheetham (
talk)
13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Styyx, here is my review. Starting with a first pass of sections:
Now checking sources (I'm using Google Translate for Dutch ones):
NABO's do not have closing barriers and are mostly used in rural areas where there are fewer people, it supports most of it, but not the "rural areas" part as far as I can see?
150 metresand the source says "approximately 154 meters".
The railway line was closed for 3 daysbut the source is only 2 days after the crash, saying more time is needed, but doesn't confirm it was 3 days in the end.
Optional minor grammar suggestions:
Overall, looking good! I'll put this on hold to give you chance to respond to the points above.
As an aside, should it also be listed on Template:Railway accidents and incidents in 2020, given it's used on the article? - Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Hooghalen train crash 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. Review: August 25, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: I'm thrilled to share the exciting news that your article has met all of Wikipedia's guidelines!
After a careful review, I'm happy to say that it's good to go. Great job! Wishing you and your family an absolutely fantastic day ahead!
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:57, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Kj cheetham ( talk · contribs) 13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Starting review, may be a few days. -
Kj cheetham (
talk)
13:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Styyx, here is my review. Starting with a first pass of sections:
Now checking sources (I'm using Google Translate for Dutch ones):
NABO's do not have closing barriers and are mostly used in rural areas where there are fewer people, it supports most of it, but not the "rural areas" part as far as I can see?
150 metresand the source says "approximately 154 meters".
The railway line was closed for 3 daysbut the source is only 2 days after the crash, saying more time is needed, but doesn't confirm it was 3 days in the end.
Optional minor grammar suggestions:
Overall, looking good! I'll put this on hold to give you chance to respond to the points above.
As an aside, should it also be listed on Template:Railway accidents and incidents in 2020, given it's used on the article? - Kj cheetham ( talk) 19:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC)