Talk:Hanlon Expressway/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 05:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Floydian ^τ _¢

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 05:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

• a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: .
• b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

WP:LEAD:

Done Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  Done Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  Done The material is not contentious and does not require inline citations. Check for Introductory text:  Done Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):  Done Major Point 1: Route description (summarised well in the lead) Major Point 2: History (summarised well in the lead) Major Point 3: Future (summarised well in the lead) Check for Relative emphasis:  Done Major Point 1: Route description (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body) Major Point 2: History (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body) Major Point 3: Future (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body) Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):  Done Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):  Done Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):  Done Check for Proper names and titles:  Done Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None Check for Pronunciation: None Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):  Done Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  Done Check for Non-English titles: Check for Usage in first sentence: Check for Separate section usage: Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  Done The lead is too short in comparison to the content in the body and should be expanded. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None

WP:LAYOUT:

Done Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  Done Check for Headings and sections:  Done Check for Section templates and summary style:  Done Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):  Done Paragraphs should be short enough to be readable, but long enough to develop an idea. (WP:BETTER). Fix "The road, like with nearby Hanlon Creek, is named after Felix Hanlon, one of the men who cut the first tree in Guelph along with John Galt. He was one of the original settlers in the area, and his family eventually deeded their land to the city.[1]" in the Route description section. Fix "On April 30, 2012, construction began on the Laird Road interchange.[5] It partially opened on the week of November 11, 2013,[13] and was fully opened on November 29, 2013, ceremoniously, with Guelph MPP Liz Sandals in attendance.[5]" in the History section. Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  Done Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):  Done Check for Works or publications: None Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): None Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):  Done Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): None Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): None Check for Links to sister projects: None Check for Navigation templates:  Done Check for Formatting:  Done Check for Images (WP:LAYIM): Check for Links: Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):

Check for WP:WTW:  Done Fixed

• There is a statement in the History section - "opened on November 29, 2013, ceremoniously, with Guelph MPP Liz Sandals in attendance." It uses inline citation or in-text attribution to Source 5. The source says "Today the Ministry of Transportation and the City of Guelph celebrated the opening of the Hanlon Expressway/Laird Road provincial interchange.". I think juxtaposing the MPP with ceremoniously may make it contentious because the source gives credit for the opening of the Expressway to the Ministry of Transportation and the City of Guelph in general.

Check for WP:EMBED:  Done

• The table is standard in such articles. Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416

2: Verifiable with no original research

• a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
• b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent Random check on accessible sources (1-7, 11, 13 & 14).

WP:RS:

Done Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (not contentious) Is it contentious?: No Does the ref indeed support the material?: Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING): Who is the author?: Guelph Public Library Ministry of Transportation of Ontario City of Guelph Google Maps The Guelph Transportation Study Committee Read Voorhees & Associates Limited Fear, Jonathan. Toronto: The Globe and Mail. Kirsch, Vik. Guelph Mercury Philips, Rajan. City of Guelph Daponte, Chris. The Wellington Advertiser. Does the author have a Wikipedia article?: What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?: very good Random check on accessible sources (1-7, 11, 13 & 14). Few are used in other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416 What else has the author published?: Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?: Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING): Reliable. Random check on accessible sources (1-7, 11, 13 & 14). Few are used in other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

WP:MINREF:
Done Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:  Done Check for Direct quotations: Check for Likely to be challenged: Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):

• c. No original research:  Done

WP:NOR:
Done Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  Done Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  Done Check for original images (WP:OI):  Done

3: Broad in its coverage

a. Major aspects:

Done Not all sources are accessible. Random check on accessible sources (1-7, 11, 13 & 14). Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources: Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS: Check for Out of scope: Check for The range of material that belongs in the article: Check for All material that is notable is covered: Check for All material that is referenced is covered: Random check on accessible sources (1-7, 11, 13 & 14). Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered: Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge: Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

b. Focused:
Done Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH): Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

WP:NPOV:

Done 4. Fair representation without bias:  Done Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  Done Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  Done Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  Done Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  Done Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  Done Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  Done Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  Done Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  Done Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images  Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license)

Images:

Done 6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Done Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  Done Image 1 (Hanlon Parkway interchange.png): This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. This version permits free use, including commercial use. Hence this image complies with The license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works. Image 2 (Highway 6 from above.jpg): This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. This version permits free use, including commercial use. Hence this image complies with The license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works. Check for copyright status:  Done Image 1 (Hanlon Parkway interchange.png): Free. Image 2 (Highway 6 from above.jpg): Free. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC): None Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR): NA 6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Done Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  Done Image 1 (Hanlon Parkway interchange.png): Relevant to the article and particularly good for the major point Route description. Image 2 (Highway 6 from above.jpg): Relevant to the article and particularly good for the major point Route description. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  Done Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  Done Caption 1: "Wellington Street interchange facing east. Highway 7 and former Highway 24 travel into the distance; Highway 6 travels south (right); former Highway 24 travels west (down); and Highway 6 and 7 travel north (left)." This caption may appear long considering the size of the image but it's perfect considering the content of the image. It's succinct and informative. Shortening it will render the image incomprehensible. Caption 2: "With the exception of the Wellington Street and Laird Road interchanges, the Hanlon Expressway features at-grade intersections." succinct and informative

As per the above checklist, the issues identified are:

• Short paragraphs in the Route description section and the History section.
• The word ceremoniously and the MPP are placed together in the statement "opened on November 29, 2013, ceremoniously, with Guelph MPP Liz Sandals in attendance".

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm glad to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 18:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• I've joined the widowed paragraph in the History section. However, the one in the Route description doesn't seem like it would fit in either paragraph as it discusses the naming of the route rather than the... err... route of the route.
• Reworded the ceremony bit to avoid boosting the MPP, and added another source to validate that she attended.

Thank you once again for taking on all four of these GANs. Your reviews are very thorough and I appreciate that, expecially for an article such as this one that may be a future A or FA candidate. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 19:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. In fact, my mentor Quadell deserves all the credit for all the good work that I'm doing here. The mistakes are all mine. It's been a pleasure and a privilege to be reviewing your articles. They are phenomenally meticulous. So thank you very much for your service to Wikipedia. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 19:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I think the "orphaned" paragraph should be left as it is. It can't be deleted because it satisfies "The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge" and "All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered". I still regret the deletion of "speed limit" because it was not contentious and hence did not need an inline citation. But it struck me later.

OK. I'm passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 19:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you :) I'm sure I could find some source that colour-codes the whole highway network based on speed limits, or use Streetview imagery. Minor giant steps. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 22:19, 8 January 2014 (UTC)