Jump to content

Talk:North Carolina Highway 231/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: 420Traveler (talk · contribs) 22:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Looks good, just a few problems

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
  • Infobox/lead
    • Add a reference to the established date in the infobox.
Easy enough, done--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add history about the former NC 231 to the second paragraph.
I made it really general (the route didn't change much), so I hope it's okay but completed.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good. Just one question: was the former NC 231 in a different part of the state?
It was, so I added a distinction that it was in Southeastern North Carolina.--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Route description
    • I suggest adding traffic count info, and whether it follows or connects to the National Highway System to the first sentence.
I added it to the end of the route description. I felt it fit in better there and I also noticed that is where it is on your Kansas articles (apologies, I was looking at them before to make my articles better).--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. And no problem, I was going to suggest you use one for a template. -420Traveler (talk) 06:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add links to first mention of each city/county/highway.
Done, I've long been unsure if I "relink" articles after the lead.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. 420Traveler (talk) 06:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • If there are links, add them to Emit and Samaria.
There are not, but another reviewer for my North Carolina Highway 133 article wanted me to link them anyway so I went ahead and did that.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good.
    • Article says North of Samaria, NC 231 crosses Turkey Creek. Near Burgess Road... Clarify what happens between Turkey Creek and Burgess Road.
Did a quick little fix by adding on to the sentence.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks great. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Article says an orientation it largely maintains for the duration of its route would "an orientation it largely maintains for the remainder of the route" sound better?
I do think that flows better so I replaced the wording.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good how you did it. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Article says NC 231 makes a turn slightly to the northeast, an orientation it follows until reaching US 64. would it sound better to change "orientation" to a different word, to avoid confusion since it was used earlier.
I changed it to direction, I think that is an appropriate differentiation but let me know if it should be something else.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect word choice. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Clarify if highway crosses over or has at-grade crossing with Coastal Carolina Railway.
The article does state "crossing over a railroad operated by...". It does cross over the railroad on a bridge but I'm unsure on how to word that without it seeming to be overstated.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean the crossing in the second paragraph. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I don't know why I didn't see that one. It's at an at-grade crossing so I added that.--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add where the northern terminus located.
It was there but the wording was probably a little confusing so I changed it around.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, but also add if its e/w/s/n etc. from what city. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I added "west of Spring Hope." Is that what you were looking for or the directions on the highways?--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • History
    • Add comma after 1935 and 1945.
Done!--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good
  • Miscellaneous
    • Add a location to all NCDOT references.
A lot of the former maps I have trouble with because if they don't tell me, they can (and often-times were) made outside of Raleigh, particularly Winston-Salem. For everything new I put Raleigh as the location.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok sound good, but was Raleigh not NCDOT's predecessors' headquarters? -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I believe so. I went through and added Raleigh to the maps.--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conclusion

Everything looks good, passing the article now. -420Traveler (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North_Carolina_Highway_231/GA1&oldid=1011752960"