Talk:Ontario Highway 136/GA1
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 05:12, 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 ♥ 05:12, 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:
Done
|
Done
|
Check for WP:WTW: None
Check for WP:EMBED: Done
- The table is standard for 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: very good Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
Done
|
Done
Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: Done
|
- c. No original research: Done
Done
|
3: Broad in its coverage
a. Major aspects:
|
---|
Done
Not all sources are accessible. Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Random check on accessible sources - Source 1 (ISSN 0825-5350) & Source 3 (ISBN 978-1-55198-226-7)
|
b. Focused:
|
---|
Done
|
4: Neutral
Done
4. Fair representation without bias: Done
|
5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes
6: Images Done (Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416.)
Images:
|
---|
Done
6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
|
As per the above checklist, the issues identified are: Fixed
The need for Relative emphasis in the lead.The First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE) of the lead can be more precise and clear.
This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm delighted to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 16:44, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review. I've fixed the first sentence and beefed up the lede with a few additional points, but I can't do much more without getting into finer details best left out of the lede. The general flow of that first sentence is consistent with all Ontario highway articles so occasionally it's hard to work in those details. Cheers, Floydian τ ¢ 00:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)