Talk:Ontario Highway 406/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grondemar (talk · contribs) 16:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Working Will post the review within the next few hours. –Grondemar 16:49, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness. I've never gotten such a quick review. Mind the occasional unsourced paragraph, as I thought I'd have a few days to do a final tidy-up. Cheers - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 17:06, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I'd hold off the review for a couple of days. Let me know when it is ready. –Grondemar 01:54, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it looks like I'm down to the lone paragraph in the Future section. I'm going to try and find the best way to source that over the next few hours (though some of it is a summary of the history up to that point), so feel free to start your review. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:32, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed my review, and have a few minor concerns that need to be addressed before this article is promoted to GA status:

I made a few copyedits; if I've inadvertently changed Canadian English to American English, please feel free to correct.
King's Highway 406? Wouldn't it be Queen's Highway 406, especially since there hasn't been a king since the highway has been built?
"Recently" it would be better to specify a more exact time, since one day the resumption of construction on the highway will no longer be "recent".
You might want to mention in the lead that, following the completion of construction, there will no longer be any at-grade crossings and the highway will be a full freeway.
"which is currently being rebuilt as a grade-separated interchange." Again, put an "as of" here because one day the construction will no longer be "current".
First paragraph under Future needs at least one citation, possibly more.
In the Exit list, do two exits really have the same number 11B?

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
This nomination is placed on hold for a minimum of seven days until the above issues are addressed.

Thanks. –Grondemar 03:19, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review! I've made your recommended changes with regard to recently and currently, as well as expanding the lead. I've also fixed the exit list so both the exit number and km span two rows (that exit is a big interchange where Highway 58 is the primary exit, but with some ramps connecting to the regional road). All the highways in Ontario have been known as King's Highways since 1930... I believe it is sourced on the linked Highways in Ontario, but if not it will be... However it has been normal practise not to go into detail about that in the many other Ontario Highway GAs since that article on the system does/will cover it. That just leaves the refs for the Future section, which I should be able to get to after my exams tomorrow. Cheers! - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 05:46, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, everything should be taken care of. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 04:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing all of my concerns. I can now

pass this nomination. Congratulations! –Grondemar 17:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]