Talk:U.S. Route 220 in Maryland/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Grondemar in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Grondemar 00:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

This is in general a good article, but it needs a few things corrected before I will promote it formally to GA status:

  • There are no images in the article, except for the map. Is it possible to take a couple of pictures of notable places on the route?
  • The Reports of the State Roads Commission of Maryland are all deadlinks. Please review and replace the link if possible.
  • In the Future section, please clarify what a "streetscape improvement project" is.
  • In the junction list, the mileage jumps from 18.86 to 42.32 to 23.58. I guess this is because the road runs along I-68, and that is the Interstate's mileage, but could you consider putting either the US 220 or the I-68 mileage in parentheses under the other mileage. I think that would be significantly less confusing.

Two other things that will not impact GA status:

  • I made several copyedits; please review and make sure I did not distort or change the meaning of the sources.
  • For future articles, you might consider using list-defined references, where the sources are listed at the end of the article in the references section instead of at first use in the wikitext. I have found using LDR makes articles significantly easier to copyedit.
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    Article will be   on hold for seven days waiting improvements.

Thanks. Grondemar 03:09, 11 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the review. To address your concerns:
    • I live far away from this highway, so I would not be able to take a few pictures of it in a timely manner. Besides, images are not required for a Good Article.
    • I fixed all of the deadlinks in the references. On your suggestion, I implemented list-defined references. I like how they work, so I will probably use them in the future in other articles.
    • A streetscape improvement involves stuff like putting in traffic calming features, building brick sidewalks, and other construction that makes a road more pleasant for pedestrians. Based on how inconsequential such an improvement is compared to a new bridge or a new alignment, I decided to remove that project from the Future section.
    • I replaced the I-68 mileage with US 220 mileage. Let me know if the Junction list is still confusing. Viridiscalculus (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply