Talk:Ontario Highway 90

Ontario Highway 90 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 9, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Canada: Ontario Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.

Canada Roads: Ontario Low‑importance

This article is part of the Canada Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to roads in Canadian provinces, territories and counties. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Canada RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject Canada RoadsTemplate:WikiProject Canada RoadsCanada road transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Topics:
/
	Ontario

This article may or may not contain a map. Please check, then add "needs-map=" to this template accordingly.

This article has a KML file.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ontario Highway 90/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 12:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this one.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:37, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
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:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments 1. There is a mention that the route was originally a "gravel highway". The cited source (8) does indeed say that the route was to receive a new black-top pavement. Obviously, any road is initially unpaved, but is there any way to substantiate it being a gravel road a macadam road or any other type of unpaved road. If not, perhaps a generic "unpaved road" might be prudent choice of words?--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC) 7.b. It was a shame that the article has no images, not even a map - even though that's not necessary for GA is none are available. Would you consider using at least a map for the infobox? If so, there's one at the commons (File:Ontario Hwy 90.gif) now.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a bit short, but it generally meets the GA criteria. There is a couple of things I'd like to have clarified, so I'll put this article on hold until then. Overall, good work.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:14, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review :) To start, I've put your map into the article. I'm in the process of making a big map for all of Ontario that I can just cut and paste into .svgs, but that may be several months or more down the road. I've changed gravel to 'unimproved', as that is the term used on the map (improved or unimproved roads). Hopefully I will get up to Barrie before the snow falls to get a picture of the highway. I agree that it's not the most substantial article, but unfortunately there aren't any details I can think to add to improve that. A pretty boring highway in the scheme of things. Cheers, ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All concerns addressed - passing the article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]