Talk:Vermont Route 14/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Good work, just some techicalities and we're done!
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
- Updated: 
— master sonT - C 04:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC) b (MoS): 
- Updated: — master sonT - C 04:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- a (prose):
- Metric conversions are needed in both route description sections.
- Second Branch White River? - This make sense, but perhaps adding "of the" makes it more of an accurate read. (Based on my assumption)
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Excellent sources. If it is possible, maybe secondary sources for the description, but the map will carry.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Updated: — master sonT - C 04:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Putting on hold pending prose review and conversion corrections
- Thanks for the quick turn-around on the review. Regarding the wording of the river, "Second Branch White River" is how it is listed on topographic maps. However, when I checked how various published texts treat this, I found more instances where it is written as "Second Branch of the White River". I have made the change as you suggested since it does read better this way. I have also added kilometer conversions for mile figures in the prose. I have also added USGS topographic maps as a reference for the route description as some of the geographic features described are not obvious on Google Maps. Let me know if you find anything else after you re-review. Thanks again. --Polaron | Talk 04:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- All "good" now - congrats. — master sonT - C 04:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick turn-around on the review. Regarding the wording of the river, "Second Branch White River" is how it is listed on topographic maps. However, when I checked how various published texts treat this, I found more instances where it is written as "Second Branch of the White River". I have made the change as you suggested since it does read better this way. I have also added kilometer conversions for mile figures in the prose. I have also added USGS topographic maps as a reference for the route description as some of the geographic features described are not obvious on Google Maps. Let me know if you find anything else after you re-review. Thanks again. --Polaron | Talk 04:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Putting on hold pending prose review and conversion corrections
- Pass/Fail:
