Talk:New Jersey Route 124/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Nice and neat article but one issue before it passes to GA.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
You need metric conversions in the Major intersections area.
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- I would recommend some "blue link" reduction throughout the article. Several links are repeated. I also notice that you've a lot of other articles waiting for review. If the other articles need metric conversions too, now would be a good time to take care of those. --Brad (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
- The other guy can do the blue links. But the metrics are not necessary as the US main system isn't metric (see WP:USRD/STDS).Mitch32(The Password is... See here!) 01:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- From what I see, I have not overused links in the article. It follows what is called for at WP:MOSLINKS in terms only being linked in the infobox, lead, once in the prose, and the table. Also, as Mitch said, it is not standard for metric conversions to be included in the Major intersections table. Dough4872 (talk) 03:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- The bluelink problem isn't going to hold the article up from GA; I will gladly pass it. However, Morristown is linked 6 times in the article. The infobox alone has Springfield Twp linked 4 times all directly underneath each other. The blue is distracting and in a lot of cases, unnecessary. Pic captions have links to places that are already linked in the section text etc. --Brad (talk) 19:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
- From what I see, I have not overused links in the article. It follows what is called for at WP:MOSLINKS in terms only being linked in the infobox, lead, once in the prose, and the table. Also, as Mitch said, it is not standard for metric conversions to be included in the Major intersections table. Dough4872 (talk) 03:13, 7 October 2009 (UTC)