Talk:New Jersey Route 19/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
- Lead is currently a bit too long; for an article of this length, the lead should be one moderately sized paragraph or two small paragraphs.
- Route 19 is sometimes called the Paterson Peripheral. - Doesn't really fit in well with the surrounding text.
- Route 19 begins at the intersection of County Route 509 (Broad Street) and County Route 609 (Colfax Avenue) in Clifton, and heads north along with County Route 509 as a four-lane divided highway with a 35 mph (56 km/h) speed limit. - Could be a bit confusing to those unfamiliar with highway terminology; is there a way you could fit in a link to concurrency (road)?
- The route passes some businesses before interchanging with U.S. Route 46. - First part of this sentence is trivial at best, indiscriminate at worst.
- Are you sure reference #3 lists the correct publisher?
- A couple more non-map sources would be good, if possible.
Looks good other than that. Placing this on-hold for now, but these issues should be easy to address. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. I have replied to the above comments. As for the pulisher in reference #3, it is correct. Dough4872 (talk) 15:05, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Looks good. –Juliancolton | Talk 15:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)