Talk:Route 491 (Pennsylvania–Delaware)
Latest comment: 5 years ago by King of Hearts in topic Requested move 25 April 2019
Route 491 (Pennsylvania–Delaware) 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
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Pennsylvania Route 491/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 17:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- Will review. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- review
- I made a few edits that you're free to revert.[1], mostly expanding names for clarification.
- What is a "Legislative Route"?
- Clarified. Dough4872 00:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- Should make clear CSX's Philadelphia Subdivision.CSX is a railroad. This is a railroad crossing?
- Clarified it's a railroad line. It is a railroad crossing. Dough4872 00:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- Everything else is fine. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review, I have replied to the above comments. Dough4872 00:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- ok, I see you have. Good work! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:31, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
- c. no original research:
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
- 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!
- Pass or Fail:
Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 00:35, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Requested move 25 April 2019
edit- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:49, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Route 491 (Delaware–Pennsylvania) → Route 491 (Pennsylvania–Delaware) – The RD, infobox, and MI currently describe the route from PA to DE. For consistency, I think we should either change the title and rework the lead, or alternatively, rework the aforementioned sections to reflect the direction of the current title. Needforspeed888 (talk) 02:08, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support - I'm okay with that if this is the standard for multi-state SR articles, as opposed to alphabetical order. Dough4872 02:10, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.