Talk:California State Route 47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	California State Route 47 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
	An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on January 15, 2008.
February 23, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

U.S. Roads WikiProject (Rated GA-Class) (Rated High-importance) This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Topics California State Highways GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. (add assessment comments) High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. The map in this article is maintained by the Maps task force. It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality, if possible. WikiProject Southern California (Rated GA-Class) California Portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Southern California, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage and content of articles relating to Southern California, its people, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. This article is also supported by WikiProject California. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. WikiProject Los Angeles     (Rated GA-Class) This article falls within the scope of the WikiProject Los Angeles, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Los Angeles, California, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) High This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale.

Contents 1 Maintenance 2 History notes 3 SR 47 4 GA review

[edit] Maintenance

Does the ACTA maintain any of Alameda Street, or is all locally maintained? It doesn't seem to have been taken over by Caltrans, despite signage and pages 6 and 10 of [1]. --NE2 23:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History notes

Note "Proposed freeway". --NE2 17:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SR 47

Only a small portion of Alameda Street is signed as SR 47. I don't think a redirect is appropriate. 71.109.121.132 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It could be split off, if you have something to write about the city street portion. --NE2 06:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

I'm passing the article now, but please note that each term needs to be linked only the first time it appears in an article. Thus, LA (for example) doesn't need to be linked over and over again. Please fix this as soon as you can for the article overall. If this isn't changed, I may delist the article. However, it's pretty minor and the article is quite good otherwise.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Again, I'm okay with passing the article right now, but the red links to street/boulevard names need to be removed. It cannot be reasonably expected that streets in LA will get articles of their own, so red linking is an unnecessary distraction.

   Some city streets are notable - WP:USST. --Rschen7754 (T C) 21:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

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):

   You've met the GA criteria for images without a doubt, but more images would be nice. I'm sure it's not too difficult to find a few to spice up things.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Great work overall, especially on providing adequate in-line citations. VanTucky 21:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I just took a quick look and although it appears that LA is linked over and over, those are actually linking to different articles, for example: Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, Downtown Los Angeles, Los Angeles Harbor, ect... --Holderca1 ^talk 22:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

If they're different dabs each and every time that's fine. But there are other duplicate links, even redlinks. Long Beach Boulevard is linked several times, for instance. It's extremely distracting for the reader and completely unnecessary. VanTucky 22:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

That was the single duplicate redlink in a section, and I removed it. --NE2 23:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)