 | Ontario Highway 90 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Ontario Highway 90/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 12:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
I'll review this one.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:37, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Comments 1. There is a mention that the route was originally a "gravel highway". The cited source (8) does indeed say that the route was to receive a new black-top pavement. Obviously, any road is initially unpaved, but is there any way to substantiate it being a gravel road a macadam road or any other type of unpaved road. If not, perhaps a generic "unpaved road" might be prudent choice of words?--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC) 7.b. It was a shame that the article has no images, not even a map - even though that's not necessary for GA is none are available. Would you consider using at least a map for the infobox? If so, there's one at the commons (File:Ontario Hwy 90.gif) now.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
The article is a bit short, but it generally meets the GA criteria. There is a couple of things I'd like to have clarified, so I'll put this article on hold until then. Overall, good work.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review :) To start, I've put your map into the article. I'm in the process of making a big map for all of Ontario that I can just cut and paste into .svgs, but that may be several months or more down the road. I've changed gravel to 'unimproved', as that is the term used on the map (improved or unimproved roads). Hopefully I will get up to Barrie before the snow falls to get a picture of the highway. I agree that it's not the most substantial article, but unfortunately there aren't any details I can think to add to improve that. A pretty boring highway in the scheme of things. Cheers, ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 16:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
- All concerns addressed - passing the article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC)