Jump to content

Talk:Ontario Highway 98/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: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 11:11, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello Floydian, I'll be taking up this review and will present it to you shortly. I hope you'll find my feedback to be helpful. Tayi Arajakate Talk 11:11, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Floydian, I've completed the review and found some room for improvements, please see the comments listed below. The issues are however borderline, so consider the comments to be more suggestions than a necessity. Otherwise the article more or less meets the criteria so I'm going to go ahead and pass it. Tayi Arajakate Talk 23:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • The article lead should contain the article title at some point, preferably in the first sentence.
    • There was a big kuflah over this years ago, and the decision was to use "[state/province] highway #" for article titles, even if the legal name (in this case "King's Highway xx") differs. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Today it is known as Essex County Road 46 between Windsor and Tilbury, and Chatham-Kent Road 8 between Tilbury and Blenheim."
    • The sentence should be re-worded to not use "today", a relative time reference; a specific date for when the name change occurred is preferable, or it should at least use an absolute term such as "As on [date], ...".
    • In addition, it might be preferable to put the current name of the highway in the first paragraph if not the first sentence rather than at the end of the lead, especially since it consists of bolded words.
  • "Today, the former route of Highway 98 is entirely urbanised to approximately 2 km (1.2 mi) east of the Highway 401 interchange."
    • Another instance of a time relative reference, should be reworded. In fact, I think for this sentence it may not be necessary to state that it is "today", if the sentence is in simple present tense, that would be easily inferred. Alternatively, one could state something along the lines that "it has become urbanised", to imply that it wasn't always so, without the need for range or period to be found over which it became so.
  • In the first paragraph of the road description section, one of the citations used is from google maps. It is alright as a source but a bit too much a primary instead of secondary one, a better source if available could be used to supplement it.
    • Swapped the citations around. The road map shows the conservation areas, Google cite is purely for the "the highway is almost exclusively surrounded by flat farmland outside of the communities that dot its length." - Floydian τ ¢ 17:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Continuing east, now as Middle Line, the route encountered the communities of Valetta, Stewart and Merlin before curving northeast."
    • The redlink is somewhat arbitrary, one of the communities (Merlin) isn't redlink while another is. Valetta is also the name of other unrelated places. I'd suggest either removing it or creating a redirect (as with Stewart) to the district or municipality it is located it (unless of course if one makes an article for it).
  • "Although the rest of the route which would later become Highway 2, from London to the Quebec boundary, was easily decided upon, the section west of London became a contentious local issue."
    • The sentence can be confusing to read, is awkwardly worded. I'd suggest reframing it.
      • Not sure how to simplify this. The road east of London was easy to decide (by the government), the portion west of London, including what became Highway 98, was contentious. - Floydian τ ¢ 19:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This arrangement would remain in place until the opening of the Ambassador Bridge on November 15, 1929,[13] which would result in several modifications to the highway network within Essex County."
    • The sentence doesn't need to use the auxiliary "would", could simply be in simple past tense, i.e "...which resulted in..." or somethin along those lines.
    • The in-citation for this sentence should be at the very end.
  • "In 1939, the province instituted a change to its "numbering" policy in which lettered suffixes would only be used for short feeder routes and not for long distance routes."
    • This sentence again can be in simple past tense, the "would" isn't necessary.

Assessment

[edit]

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

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a. (prose, spelling, and grammar): Largely clear and concise.
    b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Nothing beyond some minor borderline issues
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a. (reference section):
    b. (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable for the purpose.
    c. (OR): None found on spot checking.
    d. (copyvio and plagiarism): No copyvio issues located.
  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 non-free use rationales): Images are tagged with the appropriate copyright status templates.
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions): The article is well illustrated and images contain descriptive relevant captions.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ontario_Highway_98/GA1&oldid=1154027374"