Talk:Ontario Highway 7A/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Dough4872 01:40, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS): 
- The sentence "Eventually, the abundance of farms fades into forests and the highway dives into and out of deep glacial ravines, the headwaters of the Pigeon River." sounds awkward.
- "dives through a final ravine." also needs to be reworded.
- "Drivers then proceed west", sounds awkward.
- In the Development section, it jumps from describing dates in the 1800s to the 1900s and back to the 1800s. Is there a reason why this is done or is this perhaps an error?
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- I do not think the Ontario Back Road Atlas can support the physical surroundings of the road. Try using satellite imagery for this.
- The first paragraph of the Development subsection of the History needs references.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Can some more historical information be added to the lead?
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
I will place the article on hold to allow for fixes to be made. Dough4872 01:40, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Did some fixes. Thanks for catching that 1900s issue in the development, those dates should have been all in the 1800s (and are fixed now). I still have to add more refs for the surroundings of the RD, so I will let you know once that is done. The first part of History is a quick introduction, and all the facts should be repeated/sourced in the following two sections. I tried to cram some extra history into the lead, so let me know what you think for that one. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 22:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- All set. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 04:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- I will now pass the article. Dough4872 04:24, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- All set. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 04:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Did some fixes. Thanks for catching that 1900s issue in the development, those dates should have been all in the 1800s (and are fixed now). I still have to add more refs for the surroundings of the RD, so I will let you know once that is done. The first part of History is a quick introduction, and all the facts should be repeated/sourced in the following two sections. I tried to cram some extra history into the lead, so let me know what you think for that one. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 22:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing
[edit]The Duplication Detector shows some similarities that may need to be addressed. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Mea culpa. Forgot that the duplication detector doesn't show quotation marks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC)