Any chance of a return to Good Article status Talk Harley Davidson GA1 When this review was done the reasons for stripping this article of its Good Article status were as follows Prose quality Too many orphan sentences and single sentence paragraphs MoS compliance Introduction is too short see WP LEAD for more info Introduction should be a summary of the entire article and generally should not contain information which is not contained within the body One of the images contains a watermark for a website Citation of reliable sources where necessary Large areas of uncited information Orphan sentences only complicate the issue of finding what comes from which source Article is littered with tags and rough edits No original research Uncited information may contain original research Since that time the introduction has been expanded the offending watermark has been cropped out of the image which had been donated under the appropriate licence by the site in question and citations have been added though maybe not enough The peer reviewer tool came up with the following concerns Consider adding more links to the article per Wikipedia Manual of Style links and Wikipedia Build the web create links to relevant articles Per Wikipedia What is a featured article Images should have concise captions Per Wikipedia Manual of Style numbers there should be a non breaking space between a number and the unit of measurement For example instead of 45 cubic inch use 45 cubic inch which when you are editing the page should look like 45 cubic inch Per Wikipedia Manual of Style headings headings generally do not start with articles the a n For example if there was a section called The Biography it should be changed to Biography Per Wikipedia Manual of Style headings headings generally should not repeat the title of the article For example if the article was Ferdinand Magellan instead of using the heading Magellan s journey use Journey Per Wikipedia Manual of Style headings avoid using special characters ex in headings Per WP WIAFA this article s table of contents ToC may be too long consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia Summary style The script has spotted the following contractions Didn t if these are outside of quotations they should be expanded A search of the article found the use of didn t in a quote of a reference We should also keep an eye on WP SIZERULE which indicates that we should probably split this article Granted the 91 kB size is a gross figure and the readable prose would be somewhat less but splitting off and summarizing the History and Engines sections might be advisable The Model Designations section could also use some work O K folks are we up to it