Talk:Arizona State Route 89A
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Arizona State Route 89A/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. This isn't a review, per se, but I have a couple comments. First, the lead needs to be expanded to around two or three times its current length. Also, the image layout is odd. Maybe remove a couple of them and stick 'em in a Commons cat? Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Good article. It just needs a few fixes to pass the GA criteria.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- Some of the prose in the Route description reads a little rough to my eyes/ears. While there is a good job at not always referring to the roadway as SR 89A, it's only ever called "the highway" instead. I'd mix it up a bit more and use "the roadway", "it", "the route" or similar to break up the monotony that's developed. The same can be said for multiple references to the same town. It's acceptable to say "through the south part of town" instead of "through the south part of Sedona" just to break up the constant usage of the city's name. So many sentences in the History section start with "By ####," so that section reads a little monotonously. The history section has a left-aligned image directly under a second level heading. This is against the rule in MOS:IMAGES and should be fixed. Also, while no longer required by MOS:NUM, non-breaking spaces in the route numbers might still be a good idea.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Good sources used well in the article.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- It is stable.
- 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):
- As mentioned above, the photo in the history section needs to be moved or reformated to comply with the MOS. User:Juliancolton did recommend above that the photos be pared down and moved to a commons gallery. I can't say I disagree, but that's a judgement best left to the article's editors.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
Imzadi1979 (talk) 04:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC) P.S. I'd expand the lead a bit to make better mention of Sedona and Oak Creek Canyon, maybe at least a sentence a piece? Imzadi1979 (talk) 04:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Categories: Good article nominees | Good article nominees currently on hold | Good article nominees with no subpage | B-Class Arizona road transport articles | Mid-importance Arizona road transport articles | B-Class U.S. road transport articles | Mid-importance U.S. road transport articles | WikiProject Arizona articles | B-Class Arizona articles | High-importance Arizona articles