Talk:Pennsylvania Route 576/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rschen7754 (talk · contribs) 05:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 12 is dead.
Usually citations are not put in the lead if the details are cited in the rest of the article.
The third paragraph seems awfully trivial to put in the lead. Maybe elsewhere, but not in the lead.
doesn't - please do not use contractions in an article.
While it could be argued that Pittsburgh does have somewhat of an existing beltway - sounds like WP:OR
Additionally, I-70 in between Washington and New Stanton, as well as the Turnpike, are not up to modern Interstate Highway standards. - how is that relevant here?
A bunch of uncited stuff at the end of "Early development"
And stuff that is missing. We go from the 1980s to 2003 just like that. In the modern era, I find it hard to believe that there are no sources out there that provide information about how the highway was developed during those years.
The Findlay Connector was called as such - wordy
More uncited stuff
it would be a major boom for both the Southern Beltway - too colloquial, and how can a highway benefit from the opening of a plant?
it will be signed as Interstate 576 - was it ever approved by AASHTO and FHWA?
In the RJL - Access to McDonald and Pennsylvania Route 980 - what is McDonald? Also, we already said PA 980, why do we need to repeat it in this column?
Also in the RJL - if it's not a complete sentence, it does not get a period.

Given that this fails the sourcing and broad criterion of GA, and due to the large amount of work needed to fix the article, I will need to fail it at this time. --Rs chen 7754 20:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]