Talk:New York State Route 9L/GA1

My GA Review of this article

A good article has the following attributes:

  1. It is well written. In this respect:
         (a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
         (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.

I think 19 miles long is too long to be considered a "spur"
Avoid starting sentences with numbers (e.g., 9N, 1 mile), even if name of a route.
This sentence seems out of place and not sure why comma in middle: "The road starts off, intersecting with local roads in the city."
"paralleling" --> "running parallel"
"small hamlet" is redundant—just say "hamlet"
Awkward sentence because "concurrent" also means something else: "The route comes to an end at a junction with US 9 and NY 9N, here concurrent, south of the village center."

  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect, it:
         (a) provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;
         (b) at minimum, provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons;[2] and
         (c) contains no original research.

No. Article relies mostly on one source.

  3. It is broad in its coverage. In this respect, it:
         (a) addresses the major aspects of the topic;[3] and
         (b) stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary details (see summary style).

No. History section (and article, in general) is anemic compared to GA New York State Route 146 and FA New York State Route 174.

  4. It is neutral; that is, it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

Good

  5. It is stable; that is, it is not the subject of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Vandalism reversion, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing) and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.

No prior issues

  6. It is illustrated, where possible, by images.[4] In this respect:
         (a) images used are tagged with their copyright status, and fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
         (b) the images are appropriate to the topic, and have suitable captions.[5]

Thirteen images in good standing.

Conclusion

GAs can be short, but this article is lacking a lot of information and citations. I must fail this GAN this time but hope to see it again in the future. Best --Eustress (talk) 20:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]