Talk:California State Route 125/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled comments

History section is good and future is good this article desperately needs a section on the present routing. References are needed as well.

Also, for an article to be rated the first time, you don't need to bring it to Assessment/Requests, it'll be assessed eventually (many people check the Unassessed category frequently). Assessment/Requests is for reassessment of articles that have been assessed previously. —Scott5114↗ 17:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Avenues for improvement

Just giving the article a good skim at first, but a few things jump out at me.

1. If this has a toll road section, the article needs a section on the tolls. How are they collected? Where are the collected? Are there electronic toll collection methods as options? Who specifically collects the tolls. This should be a separate section as discussed at WP:USRD/STDS.
2. The exit list needs some tweaking. The two colspans should be shortened to span only the exit, destinations and notes columns. A postmile and location should be given for these two lines. (Leave the location blank, of course, if in an unincorporated section of the county.)
3. You're using the colored background for the SR 52 east exit. You can/should use the red background for the partial/incomplete interchanges (exit 1, 9, 15, 17A, 22) since that usage is in the color key at the bottom of the list.
4. Consulting this revision, the following issues need to be fixed with the references:
   1. This is not formatted consistently with the other references. You should use {{cite web}} or {{cite book}} to format the reference using |format=Excel in the template. {{XLSlink}} is more for external links than references.
   2. I would reformat this to match the formatting used in the infobox (S&HC § 425) instead of what's shown here (shc:250-257). I would also prefer if you could include the date that section of the code was enacted, as well as the date the URL was accessed. Finally, I'd insert the website publisher's name in the reference.
   3. Same as #2.
   4. If the atlas has a specific page number(s) for the information referenced, include it. If there are specific insets or section numbers of the map for the information being references, include it.
   5. Needs an accessdate. As a suggestion, you might want to use http://www.webcitation.org/archive.php to generate an archived copy. That site will archive a copy of the PDF, and give you a URL for the archived copy. use |archiveurl= with that URL and use the date you archived it in |archivedate=. Then if the press release is ever taken offline, you still have a valid reference to an archived copy. I would caution you though to find a better source, maybe from a local newspaper. That would be preferable to a primary source like this, and it might give you more information to include in the article.
   6. Same concerns here about using a primary source. If this media kit was ever used by the media, there should be newspaper articles or other press accounts that provide the same information.
   7. WP:SPS, self-published source. This needs to be replaced with a reliable source to pass the GA criteria.
   8. Another SPS.
   9. Yet another SPS.
   10. Accessdate needed. If it was printed in the paper, a page number would be beneficial as well. (I've found that if I get the newspapers' articles off microfilm, I can get additional information from the photos, maps or diagrams printed in the paper edition that may or may not be in the online edition or in online archives.)
   11. Needs author, publisher, publication date and accessdate information added at a bare minimum. This is a legal filing, so case name/filing number, court venue, etc. should be used for that information. This is another primary source, so if there is a press account from the time, that would be better.
   12. Accessdate.
   13. Accessdate, unlink California Department of Transportation since it's linked in the previous citation.
   14. Accessdate, unlink California Department of Transportation since it's linked in a previous citation. Use {{cite web}} to consistently format this, breaking it into two footnotes. Is there a publication date?
   15. Format this using {{cite web}} for consistency. Can you see if you can find this hosted online in another location to fix the dead link? If you can't, that's ok. It might be available through http://www.archive.org if you search there for this URL. If you can find out more information about the source, please add the publication date. Unlink California Department of Transportation since it's linked in a previous citation.
5. Can you insert the full length of the highway in the length notes in the infobox, or use the full length instead, with a note that X miles are not state maintained? If Caltrans doesn't maintain the toll road portion, update the |maint=Caltrans parameter to include who does maintain the toll road. If the infobox is displaying the maintenance automatically, you'll need to add the parameter to override the default value.
6. In the first sentence of the lead, you need to add "(SR 125) after the full name. Other mentions of state highways should also be abbreviated, and always use a   between SR and a number.
7. What is Select Arterial 680? If it's not notable enough to ever receive an article, don't link it.
8. Provide the abbreviation for after the first Interstate Highway mentioned. Then use the abbreviated name for all Interstates after that.
9. The first paragraph in the lead should be longer than a sentence. You don't even mention where the highway is! A reader has to read through the next paragraph to find out that the highway is in California. (This might seem overly obvious from the title, but it should still be explicitly mentioned up front.)
10. Spell out "California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)" somewhere in the lead. Most states departments of transportation use "DOT" in their abbreviation, and in other countries, they have a "Ministry of Transport(ation)". You can't assume your reader is American, let alone Californian.
11. "public/private partnership". The slash breaks the MOS convention on dashes and slashes; it should be replaced by a hyphen (-).
12. "The toll road's name is quite unusual, as it is built to freeway standards and therefore should be labeled a freeway under both California and federal law. See freeway and expressway for more information on the difference between the two." Why don't you explain the difference, briefly, in the body of the article? Now when I read the RD section, it says, "This route is part of the California Freeway and Expressway System". You'll need to clarify that. It's confusing. Also, I don't see anything that contradicts its federal definition. Illinois named their various freeways, like the Kennedy Expressway, using the word "expressway", yet they are still part of the Interstate Highway System.
13. "north/south freeway" needs an en dash (– or type –) instead of a slash.
14. Can you add a sentence to the first paragraph of the RD (the one with the legal mumbo-jumbo) that says something to the effect of, "The highway is defined in California's Streets and Highway Code (S&HC) in section 425."
15. The history has several unreferenced paragraphs. You'll need to find references for them.
16. "In the early 1990s, only the section south of Interstate 8 and north of State Route 94 was completed; confusingly, it was signed as State Route 94, even though it met with both westbound and eastbound Route 94 at its southern terminus." What was signed as SR 94 in the early 1990s? Are you talking about SR 125? Additionally, unlink the other highways. The RD section is short enough that you don't need to relink again so soon, nor do you need to spell out the full names again.
17. "Route 125 South" per the MOS, cardinal directions are not proper names and do not take a capital letter. The exception is names of places that incorporate a direction, like Southern California, the American South or East Jordan, Michigan. Second point, but above, the article uses the SR # abbreviation, but the history switches to Route #. Pick one (which should be the former) and stick to it.
18. Unlink U.S. Department of Transportation in the history because it is linked in the lead. Instead add a (USDOT) after the mention in the lead and use the abbreviation down below.
19. What is EBITDA? Spell it out here without any abbreviation, and if the full name isn't clear, explain it.
20. You'll need to audit through the whole history section. Every time a highway is mention, it's name is spelled out in full, and linked. If it was mentioned in the lead or the RD section, it doesn't need to be relinked. Every state route can be contracted to the SR # abbreviation format since that format should be given in the very first sentence.

I hope you find these comments helpful. This is a bare minimum of what should be done before this article is reassessed for B-Class, nominated for GA or both. I would like to see the RD section expanded in length with some additional details. What is the terrain like? Are there any other notable landmarks along the way? There is a one-sentence and a two-sentence paragraph in the section. I'd like the first expanded by at least one more sentence, and the third paragraph expanded to something similar in length to the second. If you can find some traffic counts, add highest and lowest levels to that first paragraph on the legalese and move that all the way to the end of the RD section. You'll need a tolls section to round out the comprehensiveness of the article. Otherwise, it is a good start. Imzadi 1979 → 08:56, 23 January 2011 (UTC)