Talk:Texas Recreational Road 2/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TCN7JM (talk · contribs) 02:54, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Infobox

1. Where is the US 277/US 377 intersection located?

Lead

1. Comma in the first sentence is extraneous.
2. The last sentence is grammatically incorrect, and the second phrase is more of a fragment than anything. I'd split the sentence.

Route description

1. Comma in the first sentence in unneccesary.
2. More "<verb>ing" phrases need to be replaced.
3. The comma before "before it enters rural areas" should be removed.
4. Ditto the comma before "before it continues into rural areas again".
5. I don't see a creek on either Google Maps or Bing Maps. Either way, you should try to find the name of the creek.
6. Speaking of, the comma before the creek is mentioned doesn't need to be there.
7. "The roadway intersects several small ranch roads, before bending further northeast, and proceeding." - Neither of those commas need to exist, but putting "proceeding" at the end of the sentence doesn't read well. I'd rewrite the sentence.
8. First comma in the last sentence of the first paragraph needs to go.

History

1. The map caption doesn't make much sense. How can it be a map of RE 2 when RE 2 didn't exist yet?
2. Second sentence: Both commas are...well, you know what to do by now.
3. No comma in the "Two additional concrete dips" sentence.
4. The number of residential buildings in the community is irrelevant to the actual history of the road.
5. We don't need the number of the Minute Order. Just say it was designated by TxDOT.
6. You don't need to go into that much detail about RE 255's designation. After all, RE 255 is already a Good Article. :)
7. How was the route shortened? What part of the highway was removed?

Okay, I'm terribly sorry, but I'm going to have to fail this article. Most of the route description needs a rewrite and there's some relatively important stuff missing in the history.

I would advise not sending this back to GAN. There was just barely consensus that you could recreate these and honestly, they should probably be part of the list. I'll reassess this as B-class, but am reluctant to do even that. TCN7JM 02:54, 11 April 2013 (UTC)