Jump to content

Talk:Delaware Route 3/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 22:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

DABs and ELs check out.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    See below.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Looks good.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Looks good.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Looks good.
  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):
    Looks good.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Some comments are in order before passing. Imzadi 1979  01:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lead comments
  • This section looks good and satisfies the requirements of a lead section.
Route description comments
  • The writing and content here is acceptable.
History comments
  • I understand the need for precision, and since you apparently don't have annual editions of the state maps available, you've had to resort to the "by 1924" wording. Since every single year in the section is that way, you really need some variety in wording because its really getting monotonous.
Major intersections comments
References comments
  • Footnote 1 needs complete attribution information including an access date.
  • The maps should state their publication years, even if that duplicates the edition. Some states publish multiyear editions, and some editions might be attributable to a specific publication date listed on the map. In short, the edition isn't a substitute for the publication year.
  • Maps are missing section numbers. They should be added if the map has grid sections. If the maps lack them, of course, they can't be added.
Overall comments

Looks good, so I'll list the article. Imzadi 1979  02:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]