This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. 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.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lehigh Valley, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Lehigh Valley region of Pennsylvania 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.Lehigh ValleyWikipedia:WikiProject Lehigh ValleyTemplate:WikiProject Lehigh ValleyLehigh Valley articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
I am glad to say that this article which was nominated for good article status has succeeded. This is how the article, as of July 3, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:
1. Well written?: The article is well written with correct spelling and proper grammar usage. The red-link to Cedar Creek Park should probably be removed if the park is not notable however.
2. Factually accurate?: Article is factually accurate.
3. Broad in coverage?: Yes, covers all major points including the history and description of the road.
4. Neutral point of view?: Written in an neutral point of view.
5. Article stability? Very stable. No edit wars and little vandalism.
6. Images?: Contains diagrams and maps which is enough for the article although an actual picture of the route may be helpful.
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status.
— --Hdt83Chat19:15, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]