Talk:Albany Highway/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 18:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll be starting this review shortly. As is my usual practice, I'll have some additional comments designed to improve the article that won't be factored into whether or not the article is listed as a GA. It is my opinion that Good Articles should still be good articles, even if the criteria are conspicuously silent on certain points. These additional suggestions are just that, suggestions to improve upon the article and not requirements for GA. Imzadi 1979 → 18:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

To start, there is a disambiguation link present in the article, linking to Bunbury.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   There are some prose issues to be cleared up. They're listed below.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are some suggestions below to polish off the citations.

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   See some notes below on captions though.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Once the prose is fixed, this can be passed. Imzadi 1979 → 19:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

• Prose comments:
  • "with only sixteen miles (26 km) completed" up to you, but usually numbers 10 and higher are rendered as numerals. I'd just audit the cases where whole numbers are spelled out, excepting those that start sentences, to see which ones should be switched for consistency. There's a case of "8 miles" lower in the article which should be spelled out, which other cases should be switched to numerals if following the 10 and higher rule.
  • "with signs of human activity becomes more sparse as the highway crosses the Darling Scarp" verb tense mis-match?
  • "Assistant Surveyors Alfred Hillman D. Smith" missing an "and" in there to separate, yet connect, the two names?
  • the quotation: "the native 'Handsome'." should be followed by a citation per the GA criteria on what needs to be quoted, and the punctuation should be shifted outside of the quotation marks per WP:LQ.
  • "which led to his mail horse was seized", another verb tense mis-match here?
  • "the Board's work schedule prioritised the upgrade worst individual segments" a word missing here?
  • "and drivers' would experience quite varied conditions"" shouldn't be a possessive there?
  • "The cooperation of the Canning Road District would be required, to continue the Berwick Street bypass..." I'm not sure a comma should be used there.
  • "Main Roads returned to it's usual operations" wrong "its" there.
  • "In 1973 construction began on upgrading..." Tony1 has a great writing tutorial that advises against using a preposition and an -ing form, so that would better worded "In 1973 construction began to upgrade...". That's more of an FA-level critique, but still something to acknowledge.
  • "Over a ten year period" the number needs to be hyphenated to the unit since they're jointly serving as an adjective.
  • " in Perth, but was improved" since there isn't a subject after the conjunction ("but") there shouldn't be a comma before the conjuction.
  • "Several other improvement projects were planned to be undertaken in the 1990s"" this just reads as a clunky phrasing.
• Captions—the caption for the first photo is a complete sentence: "Albany Highway is a dual carriageway in Cannington." It should have a period at the end for that reason, or it could be recast as "Albany Highway as a dual carriageway in Cannington".
• Citations—just a few immediate suggestions:
  • You might want to use {{cite map}} for n1.
  • The edition on n3 would look better as |edition=13th so that it renders as "13th ed.".
  • The format on n12 looks odd. Maybe it can be fixed to look like the others?
  • Things like n17 would look better if a full citation were provided.
  • Headlines should be reduced from all caps, like in n36.
  • I've noticed this with http://www.worldcat.org/ 's database entries where they will insert a space before the colon that separates a title from a subtitle, as n45 has, but that space should be removed. Also, even in sentence case, a subtitle should start with a capital letter.
  • It looks like there's a title on n52 that should be taken out of italics and put into quotation marks.
  • On a few of the map citations, you probably should replace |cartography= Main Roads Western Australia with |author= Main Roads Western Australia since the update to {{cite map}} includes proper authorship attribution now.

Thanks for the review, Imzadi1979. I have edited the article to address the comments above. - Evad37 [talk] 05:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, Evad37, and everything looks good. Imzadi 1979 → 14:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

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.