Jump to content

Talk:Ohio State Route 633/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: MusikAnimal (talk · contribs) 04:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first GA review, so I have selected a shorter nominee. I will be thorough and honest in my assessment, and please let me know of any differences in opinion. — MusikAnimal talk 04:12, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Issues

[edit]

Lead:

  • Its northern terminus is also in Wickliffe, this time at a signalized intersection with Lakeland Boulevard...
Please lend your opinion, but I don't much care for the usage of the wording this time. Replacing it with a simple but sounds more appropriate. That being said, I'm no grammar expert.

Under Route description:

  • ... not included in the National Highway System [which are] deemed most important for the economy, mobility, and defense of the nation ...
A few concerns. Perhaps there is no harm in clarifying that, despite its name, State Route 633 is not part of the National Highway System – but I feel it may be getting a little off-subject. It may also lend undue weight toward the national system ("deemed most important"), and lastly the provided reference does not mention any of this.
  • ... 6,320 vehicles travel on SR 633 on average every year
I'm confused about the reference here, which appears to be an interactive map. There's a lot of buttons but I don't see any way to reveal travel data. Am I missing something?
  1. Go to the traffic tab on the left.
  2. Click the square, and drag over an area (for this case, SR 633)
  3. Look for SR00633
  4. Profit.
Or I could just cite the actual traffic report instead.—CycloneIsaacE-Mail 21:27, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Under History:

  • This routing is designated as state highway by the 1932 map
Potential problem with grammar. However minor, it sounds like there should be an a before state highway? I could be wrong.

MusikAnimal talk 05:41, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@MusikAnimal:All fixes done.—CycloneIsaacE-Mail 22:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! Let me double check these references and I think we're good to go :) — MusikAnimal talk 15:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]