Talk:Ontario Highway 64/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: EuroCarGT (talk · contribs) 22:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this Ontario highway-related article for good article article quality grading. I have this page on my watchlist. --///EuroCarGT 22:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Quick check

• No dead links: Y
• No links to disambiguation page(s): Y

Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably 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:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• Length of the article seems short and start class

• All highway articles get three major sections: A description of the route, a retelling of the history, and a list of major intersections. This article may be short in length, but it comprehensively covers its subject with all the information that is available about it. Have a look at some of the other two-digit Ontario highway GAs for comparisons. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 16:47, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

I understand, I'm cool with that. As an experience editor like you I ensure you understand Good Articles and all, so I'll gt on this review tonight. --///EuroCarGT 20:25, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

• Infobox is properly cited with reliable sources
• Lead is good, may need some re-writing as some parts were hard to understand such as: as it arcs between Highway 69 and Highway 17, and provides a shortcut between the latter and Highway 11 northwest of North Bay - After North Bay, theirs no period.
• Route description is good, gallery of 2 photos are good
• History section is good
• Major intersections is great and descriptive with the distances listed
• References are good, all are in citing templates and no bare URLs
• External links are useful + KML is useful

Their maybe rewording need in the route description and history section, it is good at it's current point but improvements could be used. --///EuroCarGT 02:11, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I've puffed up the RD a little and made the fix to the lede, but I can't do much with the history. Let me know how it looks now. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 21:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Great! I'm in the process of filling up the checklist and setting the result. The changes are great, especially with the new updated source. ///EuroCarGT 01:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)