Talk:Texas Park Road 30/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk · contribs) 20:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is a bit confusing: is the road actually located within the state park or not?

The MOS has standardized decades to "1930s", not "1930's". (fixed my myself as it is beyond the GA criteria)
Perhaps I overseeing the obvious, but where in ref two does it state that the road is PR30, or even which of the grey lines is PR30 and which are not?

The reference does not say that the road is PR 30. Rather, it supports the fact that a road does pass the stated landmarks. Ref three states that the road is PR 30.

Remember to add |adj=on to {{convert}} when it is an adjective to give "mile" instead of "miles". (fixed)
Something has to be done with sentence "The entire highway is in none." which seems to be created by a template.

This does have something to do with the template. This is an error with the template. I have notified USRD so that they may be able to fix it.

The infobox states that the road is maintained by the Texas Department of Transportation, but this is not mentioned in the body. This is particularly important because the road could just as well have been managed by the state park department.

This is considered unimportant to include in the body of the article. The TxDOT actually maintains all roads located within state parks, and gets to decide which ones they want to number.

The problem is that it is not obvious. It could very well have been part of the responsibility of Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, which is why a single sentence to clarify the issue would have been great. It is the sort of information I would like to have known. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a sentance to clarify. - Awardgive, the editor with the msitaken name. 04:27, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to the stated issues. - Awardgive, the editor with the msitaken name. 00:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations with a good article, and not the last, I presume. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]