Jump to content

Talk:Mississippi Highway 465

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mississippi Highway 465/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ncchild (talk · contribs) 09:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will start review. Expect comments by Monday...

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

I'll note in my comments below any additional suggestions, which aren't strictly required to meet the GA criteria, but those that are meant to make sure that the resulting GA is actually a good article.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Well written, very clear and to the point but gives enough information about the route.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    Citations look good. Article is well cited.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Article stays on focus in both the route description and the history, covers the major aspects about the route and its routing along with going into good detail about the history.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    I see no bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Since there are no pictures I can't really say anything.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Good job with the article, I think I'm going to use it to model some of my smaller GA's in the future. Everything seemed good to me, so it passes.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mississippi Highway 465. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]