Talk:Maryland Route 18/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Racepacket (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

Thank you for nominating this article. Please change Kent Island to Kent Island. No invalid external links.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

You handled the challenge of describing so many sub-routes well.

Based on my reading of the map, there appears to be a MD 18/US 301 concurrency in Queenstown until Del Rhodes Ave. Is this how it is signed, and should it be reflected in the route description and the table?

Please note that the widening of US 50 to 6 lanes and the construction of the MD 18 bridge is not currently funded as of February 2011. http://apps.roads.maryland.gov/WebProjectLifeCycle/ProjectSchedule.asp?projectno=QA2362717
The labels on Google Maps often have mistakes. MD 18 does not have a concurrency with US 301.

I know that the bridge is not currently funded. I included this because it is listed as a pre-construction project on the SHA website. If I had not included it, you would have asked if there is any construction planned. Oh wait, I just noticed you asked that further down.

None of the issues you listed in this section relate to prose quality. If you are going to fill out this template, please place your comments in the correct sections. V C 02:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is a fair criticism, I will try to do better in the future. Racepacket (talk) 16:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

Perhaps tie the extension of US 50 into Kent Island with the construction of the Bay Bridge.

Other than the possible bridge over US 50 near Queenstown, is there any other construction planned?
I take your answer above as "no."

Although not a requirement, perhaps the article could explain why MD 18 is not suitable as a way to bypass the mulit-mile backups on the approach to the Bay Bridge, because tolls are only collected on the eastbound bridge traffic, so no long toll lines occur on Kent Island.
MD 18 was never part of the Bay Bridge so relating the extension of US 50 to the construction of the Bay Bridge is out of the scope of this article.

Explaining why MD 18 is not a suitable bypass route is original research without reliable sources (see criterion 2C). V C 02:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Bay Bridge opened in 1952. You linked MD 18 to the divided highway expansion of US 50 in the 1950s, but isn't it really tied to the opening of the Bay Bridge? The divided highway was built as the eastern approach to the Bay Bridge. The question is how to make this article easy for the reader to follow what happened. I am not pressing you on the backup issue.
I linked MD 18 to the divided highway expansion of US 50 because MD 18 was assigned to the route US 50 followed from 1949 to 1952, prior to the opening of the divided highway. I am not sure what you want me to do here. V C 22:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
No edit wars.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
This article represents significant work by its author. Putting review on hold for you to address concerns. Racepacket (talk) 20:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your review, Racepacket. V C 02:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanation. Congratulations on another good article. Racepacket (talk) 00:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]