Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/U.S. Route 25 in Michigan

U.S. Route 25 in Michigan

edit

The article was promoted to A-Class. –Fredddie 22:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

U.S. Route 25 in Michigan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
Nominator's comments: I've got a request for a map in place, but it It has been suggested that this article is FAC-able in the near future. I'd like a review here to prep it for a nomination.
Nominated by: Imzadi 1979  13:21, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
First comment occurred: 22:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

First of all, some housekeeping: I don't think that Imzadi1979 will be proceeding with the full length of the review before a FAC due to the low activity levels across the project, so this is structured more like a peer review and I don't expect responses here. Accordingly I won't be doing a image review or source review at this stage either.

Preliminary checks
  • The sourcing of the more recent history is a bit heavy on maps. I'm not necessarily opposed to this, but I assume you've checked the archives.
  • No other issues.
Lead
  • Its general routing took it - a bit repetitive
RD
  • there-unnumbered - then-unnumbered?
  • Last paragraph - two consecutive sentences starting with "North of"
History
  • principle -> principal
  • although all sections of it are still state highways - needs a cite to a recent map

Otherwise it seemed pretty straightforward. --Rschen7754 22:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rschen7754: all done, if you'd like to take a look. I have checked the various news archives, and I will do so again right before any FAC nomination just to make sure that we've exhausted the options to replace citations. Imzadi 1979  07:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Dough4872

Comments by Dough4872:

  1. "At the crossing of the Huron River, US 24/US 25 crossed into Flat Rock and Wayne County." you use the verb cross twice.
  2. I noticed US 25 is overused a little bit in the route description, might want to change some instances.
  3. When US 25 was created in 1926, what route was the northern terminus at in Port Huron? This should be clarified in the history.
  4. "The first, in Port Huron provides access to the Blue Water Bridge from the mainline of the highway in 1940.", this should be in past tense.
  5. Do you have the AASHTO minutes for the date they approved the decommissioning of US 25 in Michigan? That would be worth mentioning in the history.
  6. In the related trunklines section, you should clarify where the termini were for both the US 25As along with Bus. US 25. Also you may want to consider giving each one a mini-infobox and a subsection as I assume they are not covered anywhere else.
  7. If possible, I would suggest getting more pictures for the article, even historical map scans that are appropriately licensed would work. Dough4872 02:01, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dough4872: all done except the photos/maps. I'll work on that a bit later today. Imzadi 1979  11:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Image check

I'll go ahead and claim this one. Shouldn't take too long. SounderBruce 20:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  1. File:US 25 Michigan 1948.svg – PD-self (based on image licensed as PD-MUTCD)
  2. File:US 25 MI map.svg – CC-BY-SA 3.0 / GFDL
  3. File:Intersection of M-125 & US 24.JPG – CC-BY 3.0
  4. File:Interstate 94 MI at Exit 271.jpg – CC-BY-SA 2.0 (Flickr transfer OK'd by bot)
  5. File:M-25-MI-s01.jpg – CC-BY-SA 3.0 / GFDL
  6. File:US 25 Gratiot Ave 1941.jpg – PD-US-1978-89 (quick records search brought up no renewal, so it's PD for the U.S. at least)
  7. Captions: I don't think including the months on modern images is all that necessary, but it isn't something that warrants a no vote.

Support. Images are in order and do as good a job of illustrating a former highway as one can today. SounderBruce 21:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source review - I had already checked source reliability when I did the first review, but looked again and found no issues. I looked at the formatting and couldn't find anything to note either. --Rschen7754 21:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.