Talk:New York State Route 9L/GA2
GA Review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- The article is very short, and some of the sentences need rewording.
- A. Prose quality:
- The prose uses alot of "starts off", that should be replaced with "begin" to satisfy word choice. Though the route description section is written very descriptively.
- B. MoS compliance:
- B. MoS compliance:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- Only five references? That does not verify much of the content, if more sources are available to source some of the prose, it will verify the article more, and will meet the GA criteria more.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- per above
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- I feel this article should and can be expanded, is there not any more information on the history of this route? Is there any other current information on the route, besides the new bridge?
- 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:
- An image of the route itself could be added to the article, though, if one is not available, it doesn't affect its' GAN, however, attempting to find one would help illustrate the article.
- 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:
- The article is relatively short, though, if the above concerns are addressed, it may pass, for now it does not meet the GA criteria to the fullest, however, I will give it time for the above concerns to be addressed. Notify me when the concerns are addressed. Best of wishes.
- Pass or Fail:
SRX--LatinoHeat 20:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
- I've gotten most of it. Can you give it a lookover?Mitch32contribs 21:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
- It look's a bit better. Though I feel the lead could be expanded like the Borman Expressway, is their information like why the highway is named the 9L? Any other info of about the route?00:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)SRX--LatinoHeat
- Lead expanded. Mitch32contribs 12:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- It look's a bit better. Though I feel the lead could be expanded like the Borman Expressway, is their information like why the highway is named the 9L? Any other info of about the route?00:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)SRX--LatinoHeat
- I've gotten most of it. Can you give it a lookover?Mitch32contribs 21:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
- All of my concerns have been addressed rapidly and fixed properly, making this article fit the criteria more, thus the article now passes this GAN, congratulations.--SRX--LatinoHeat 13:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC)