Talk:Washington State Route 230/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Imzadi 1979 → 20:14, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

DAB and EL are good.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I made a few minor edits, but the prose was sound.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   No issues here.

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, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images would be nice, but for an unbuilt road, it would be kind of impossible unless a current photo of where road would run is added or a map is created off WSDOT planning documents.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Nice job. With a few minor edits I applied, the article meets the criteria. Imzadi 1979 → 01:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)