Talk:Maryland Route 194

Maryland Route 194 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 26, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 26, 2011.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Woodsboro and Frederick Turnpike, which is now part of Maryland Route 194, was the last private toll road in Maryland when it was purchased by the state in 1921?

U.S. Roads: State highways / Maryland Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Topics

U.S. state highways

Locations

Maryland

This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.

This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

Article recognition:

	This article was the selected article of the Maryland Roads portal in April 2016.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Maryland Route 194/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ebe123 (talk · contribs) 13:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

No dead links;
No disambiguation page links;

This article seems good to go, but here's some things:

Reference list blocked by {{Portal box}} (that should be in see also or external links)

Comments

Hold now for 7 days (would get fixed before.) ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 13:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review, Ebe123. The portal box should not be under External links because portals are internal to Wikipedia. WP:ALSO says portal boxes are usually placed in a See also section, but it does not say they are required to be there. Likewise, Template:Portal says portal boxes are meant to be placed in a See also section, but does not say that is required. The reference list is narrowed, but it is still readable and no information is obscured. Is there an accessibility concern? V C 16:58, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest putting {{Portal bar}} instead. There can be accessability concerns but it's mostly for the visual aspect. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 19:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

None of this is dealt with in the GA criteria, meaning that if this is the only hang up, I suggest that the article be listed and promoted. Imzadi 1979 → 20:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll promote. ~~Ebe123~~ → report on my contribs. 21:00, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]