Talk:Delaware Route 62/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 16:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Dabs and ELs look good.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Looks good.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Looks good as well.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Given the length of this highway, the content could be padded slightly with the AADT and NHS information.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Rare to see otherwise in highway articles.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   I fixed the caption for you because it wasn't a full sentence, it didn't need a period.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I'm passing, but still recommending that the above suggestion be implemented. Imzadi 1979 → 17:19, 10 February 2012 (UTC)