Talk:Interstate 91/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: Mgasparin (talk · contribs) 07:52, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this page over the next day or so, please watch for my comments. Thanks!! Mgasparin (talk) 07:52, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

GA Criteria

1. Is the article well written?

Overall, I have few problems with the writing and find it easy to read and understand. One small change I would like to make is in the History section, the sentence After the September 11 attacks... should be changed to

After the September 11 attacks, a seldom-staffed temporary border patrol checkpoint was installed near White River Junction, Vermont, about 100 mi from the Canadian border.

The article also complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

 Done AmericanAir88^(talk) 12:56, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable?

This is what I have the most problems with. The section on Vermont contains 3 paragraphs that are completely uncited. That will fail GA immediately.

However, I cannot find any other instances of missing citations, or problems with WP:OR, copyvios, etc.

 Done AmericanAir88^(talk) 13:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

3. Is it neutral?

Given the article's subject, there is no reason why it wouldn't be neutral.

4. Is it stable?

The article does not appear to change much from day to day, and there aren't any edit wars, content disputes, etc.

5. Is it illustrated appropriately by images?

Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content

Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Overall, not a bad article. Just fix those citation issues and that minor issue in wording and it should be good. Thanks!! Mgasparin (talk) 10:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Mgasparin: Thank you so much for this review. It has been about a year since nomination. I have fixed all the issues you have presented. AmericanAir88^(talk) 13:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@AmericanAir88: Thank you so much for your prompt replies. I am satisfied with the article now and am ready to pass this article. Good Job! Mgasparin (talk) 19:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Mgasparin: Appreciate it. AmericanAir88^(talk) 19:28, 17 August 2019 (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.