Talk:New Jersey Route 38

New Jersey Route 38 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
October 27, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

U.S. Roads: State highways / New Jersey 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

New Jersey

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 New Jersey task force in September 2013.

New Jersey Mid‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:New Jersey Route 38/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hey Dough, you've been doing some wonders on this article; I don't see much room for improvement should this cross the threshold into GA status, although there are are few things.

Here's what I see:

The most glaring problem I see with this article, to tell the truth, are all the redlinks. This should be dealt with accordingly; per the redlink guideline, all redlinks that you feel you can create stubs for (that would be expandable and notable, rather than a permastub or something that would end up going meeting WP:CSD) you should. Otherwise, you should remove the redlinks that you cannot create stubs for.

According to the Route description criterion in the Standards portion of WP U.S. Roads, third-level headers are not necessary when discussing intrastate routes, such as this one. I personally believe that it helps out when organized in this way, so I'll leave the decision up to you.

Something that mentions how it services the Philadelphia metro area should be added into the article; I am not from New Jersey or Pennsylvania, and I only realized it was in the Philadelphia area when I saw "Camden" listed.

I understand that the lead can go into "considerable detail," but for an article this size I think three paragraphs is too much. I nominated a city article once with ten sections and placed it up with a three paragraph lead, and I got nailed for it. Is there anything that you can shave off?

Once those are fixed, in my honest opinion, I think this will be ready.

Good luck and good work, --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 02:58, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone back and made the suggested changes Dough4872 (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool; it appears that all my concerns have been sufficiently addressed. I hope you do not mind if I call in a mentor to check my review over, and to make sure it is watertight; I am trying to get warmed up to the GA reviewing process. --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 04:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing well, Starstriker. I also think this article is ready for GA. The only thing that I think could be changed is this:

"The route is a four– to six–lane divided highway for most of its length and passes through commercial developemnt, residential development, and some farmland." I don't think that the endashes are needed.

Otherwise, great job, both of you. bibliomaniac 1 5 21:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the endashes. Dough4872 (talk) 01:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I think you are ready; congratulations. --Starstriker7(^{Dime algo}_{or see my works}) 02:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USRD GA audit

This article has failed the USRD GA audit and will be sent to WP:GAR if the issues are not resolved within one week. Please see WT:USRD for more details, and please ask me if you have any questions as to why this article failed. --Rschen7754 (T C) 04:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Dough4872 (talk) 22:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on New Jersey Route 38. 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) 04:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]