Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/D21 road (Croatia)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

D21 road (Croatia)[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Passed with 3 net support votes (3 support, 0 oppose). —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:55, 23 June 2013 (UTC) [reply]
Toolbox

D21 road (Croatia) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
Nominator's comments: I'm nominating this article for ACR, because I would like to prepare it for a FAC, and based on the experience gained here submit several articles on Motorways in Croatia for ACR.
Nominated by: Tomobe03 (talk) 19:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First comment occurred: 20:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Review by Dough4872[edit]

Review by Dough4872
  • I will review the article. Dough4872 20:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  1. I would reorder "Kaštel border crossing to Slovenia Slovenian G11" in the infobox to say "Slovenian G11 at Kaštel border crossing to Slovenia."
  2. In the infobox, is "A9 in Medaki, Vodnjan north and Vodnjan south interchanges" supposed to indicate that D21 intersects that road at those three locations? If so, I would list each instance separately in the proper order.
  3. The sentence "The northern terminus of the route is located at the Croatia–Slovenia border at the Dragonja River—connecting to Koper, Slovenia, and Trieste, Italy, via the Slovene route G11 and forming a part of the European route E751" is very long. Also, you do not mention where the southern terminus of the road is.
  4. The sentence "As the D21 reaches Kaštel, it assumes a southern orientation, taking route to the city of Buje about 3.5 kilometres (2.2 miles) down the road." sounds awkward.
  5. The sentence " In Buje, the D21 forms at-grade intersections with the D200 linking the Plovanija border crossing with Slovenia, the D300 road to Umag, an eponymous interchange of the A9 motorway, as well as county roads Ž5007 and Ž5008." seems unclear to me. It seems to imply that the interchange with A9 is at-grade. I would perhaps fix this by removing the comma after the D200 clause and replacing it with "and" and clearly indicating Ž5007 and Ž5008 are at-grade in that clause. Also, how is the A9 interchange "eponymous"?
  6. In the sentence "At Baderna, the D21 connects with the D302 state road connecting Poreč and the A9 motorway, located west of the road junction, as well as the D48 road leading to Pazin east of the D21." you use the verb connects twice. Can of of these instances be changed?
  7. The sentence "After approximately five kilometres (3.1 mi), the route reaches a grade separated intersection with the D303 state road the Kanfanar interchange of the A9 motorway, situated east of the D21, and the city of Rovinj located at the coast, west of the intersection" is long and reads awkward.
  8. Overall, the route description reads as a listing of junctions and towns. Do you think you can add some details about the physical surroudinds and any landmarks near the road?
  9. The sentence "The Via Flavia connected Tergeste, present-day Trieste, to Pula via Poreč, before turning back north along the eastern coast of Istria to Nesactium and Tarsatica, modern-day Trsat, itself a part of Rijeka today" is long and choppy.
  10. The sentence "Around year 1030, only Via Sclavonica is recorded in the region—running from west to east, connecting Poreč and Pazin." needs to be reworded.
  11. The major intersections list is hardcoded. I would recommend converting it to the {{jctint}} series of templates so a conversion from kilometers to miles will show up.
  12. Is it possible for some pictures showing the actual road to be added to the article?
  13. There is an error with the ISBN in reference 12. Dough4872 18:34, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I tried to address issues 1-7, 9, 10, and 13, could you take another look at those and suggest further improvements if needed. Regarding the photo (issue 12), I found zero available photos at the Commons, but I'll try to find one at Flickr or Panoramio and ask the uploader(s) to permit use on the Commons. Unfortunately, I'm not quite near the road (and it is not a very practical option for me to snap a photo myself), but I'll post a note on the Croatian wiki asking for a volunteer - that worked before for another photo request.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:31, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence "In Buje, the D21 forms at-grade intersections with the D200 linking the Plovanija border crossing with Slovenia and the D300 road connecting to the town of Umag and Umag interchange of the A9 motorway." is very long. Maybe split the part about the A9 interchange into a new sentence. Also waiting for issues 8 and 11 to be addressed. Dough4872 16:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Re JCT table (issue 11), I'm not sure how to avoid county column (omitting it completely messes up col headings and contents (km goes under location and location to county etc), and I'm not sure what to provide under location for row 2 - it's located outside any settlements, it is not numbered or named junction - right now there's "-" as a placeholder. Also, 2 junctions in Buje at 6.6km are actually a single intersection, D200 is reached turning right from the D21 and the Ž5008 turning left (for southbound D21 traffic), should the two be merged in a single template (like Ponte Porton), with this explanation in the notes instead? Furthermore the Ž5008 now wraps in the table cell - is there a way to include a nowrap option?--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As a possible way out of the blank "location" cells, would it be acceptable to use name of the municipality/city area or settlement area (which includes not only built up area but also adjacent undeveloped land administrated as a part of the settlement) where the junction is located instead of the specific settlement name? In addition, the name= parameter does not seem to produce anything when used at the "Medaki interchange" the only named intersection along the route. What did I do wrong there?--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:06, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Re photo, an editor living in the vicinity of the D21 volunteered to snap a few shots for the article, so those should be up in a reasonably short time.--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:54, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Still waiting on issue 8 to be addressed. Dough4872 21:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the delay. I added a general description of the settings now. Nothing spectacular along the road, I'm afraid. Most of the route runs through a patchwork of agricultural land interspersed with small settlements and occasional grove or shrubland patch, except for a section between Bale and Baderna where forests are predominant (still other types of land use exist too), and the last leg of the route ahead of Pula, running through city suburbs.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - My issues have been addressed. This article sets a model that other Croatian road articles can follow. Dough4872 17:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Fredddie[edit]

I will review this article as well. –Fredddie™ 22:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, welcome to ACR, Tomobe! Usually, I do a line-by-line review of the text, but first I want to address the junction list. For some readers, it's what draws your eye the most. Whenever I work on an article, I fix the jct list first.

Review by Fredddie
  1. I fixed the county column issue for you. You're not familiar with the templates, so I can understand your frustration with them. We should create a Croatia-specific template, probably {{HRVint}}. That way the km column comes before the miles column.
  2. The most jarring thing to me is the width of the notes column. Reducing the width means we need to move or remove some text.
    1. For instance, if I were editing the notes, I would only keep "Kaštel border crossing to Slovenia[21]; northern end of E751 concurrency" The route description should tell the reader that D21 traffic defaults to G11, not the notes column.
    2. Cities should be listed in the Destinations column as such:
      Ž5007 – Šterna, Oprtalj, Karojba
    3. I'm wondering why each instance of {{Jct}} is on a separate line. Typically, they can be combined as such:
      D200 / Ž5008 – Plovanija border crossing, Grožnjan

I will continue once the junction list is in order. –Fredddie™ 00:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the guidance on the Jct template. I'm not sure how to combine the first line entries (Kaštel border crossing) though.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:26, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Am I expected to do something else in the JCT list?--Tomobe03 (talk) 11:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No. It looks great. I will continue my review in the next day or so. –Fredddie™ 11:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing my review...

Lead and infobox
  1. The only issue I have with the infobox is that on the map, I'd like Croatia to stand out from the other countries. This is a wish and not a demand, so don't worry if this can't be done.
  2. I am seeing a lot of direct articles that may not need to be there. "The D21" and "the Istria County" stuck out the most in the lead.
    Hope I got them right this time.--Tomobe03 (talk) 07:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. "The D21 route is generally parallel to the A9 motorway and the two form several junctions, ..."
    "The D21 route is generally parallel to the A9 motorway. The two meet at several junctions, ..."
  4. Do both routes serve Buje, Bale, and Vodnjan directly or do the junctions serve the cities?
    I'm not sure what do you mean. The D21 runs through those towns (or along outskirts of the settlements as in case of Vodnjan), but the motorway obviously runs close by and not through those towns. Could you please clarify?--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "...at the southern tip of Istria Peninsula." I'd suggest either calling it the Istrian Peninsula or simply Istria.
    Done.
  6. The sentence that first mentions Hrvatske ceste should be a new paragraph.
    Done.
  7. The last paragraph should start out with "In classical antiquity, the western Istria route..."
    Done.
  8. "The present-day D21 route was a part of the M2 Adriatic Highway route since after the Second World War."
    Removed.
    1. I'm not sure since is the right word here, but I don't have a suitable replacement just yet. I'm thinking it would be best to remove "since".
    2. Was M2 a Yugoslavian designation? That should be mentioned in the lead.
      Yes, that was a Yugoslav designation, but also adopted by Croatia. The road marking system only changed in 1997.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]


More to come, but feel free to work on these. –Fredddie™ 03:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. I already addressed some of the issues raised, and will continue to work on those.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clarify the Buje, Bale and Vodnjan junctions question?--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. This is the sentence in question: The two form several junctions, either directly or via short connectors, while serving the towns of Buje, Bale and Vodnjan directly. If you get rid of the clause in the middle, it reads The two form several junctions while serving the towns of Buje, Bale and Vodnjan directly. I don't suggest getting rid of that clause, I was only demonstrating. That shortened sentence reads like both the A9 and D21 serve all three towns directly. If you look at a map, only D21 serves all three directly. Hope that helps. –Fredddie™ 22:52, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it does. Thanks.--Tomobe03 (talk) 07:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased.--Tomobe03 (talk) 07:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Route description
  1. I don't think it's necessary to mention that D21 is in Croatia in the first sentence. The article's title and the first sentence of the lead demonstrate this enough already.
  2. The final 2.2 kilometers... "final" is ambiguous since most roads have two ends. You should use southernmost instead.
  3. Not a big deal, but you can probably get away with abbreviating kilometers in each instance of {{Convert}} and {{Convert/spell}} after the first sentence of the RD. I'll double check the MoS. In the US, we typically do not abbreviate since mile is such a short word anyway.
  4. I should have been more clear above, but I added back some direct articles where D21 is an adjective and not a noun, ("To the north of D21 terminus...", for example) and removed some where they should not have been.
  5. Since the Dragonja does not have "River" in the link, I don't think you have to include it, but if you decide to keep "River", it should be piped in Dragonja River.
  6. After you say ...the county roads Ž5007 and Ž5008... any mention of the Ž roads don't have to say they are county roads.
Done all except abbreviating kilometres - I'll also check once more what the MOS says and fix accordingly. I don't really care one way or another, as long as it conforms to the MOS.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:40, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
History
  • No issues that I can see.
Traffic volume
  1. The only issue I have is what do the numbers at each counting site (the 2702 in "2702 Kaštel") mean?
The 2702 in that case is the number of the counting site, specified in the source. Each counting site on the Croatian road network has a unique four-digit number ID as well as the name.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sources
  1. Your Google Maps links should use a more specific title than the default "D21 road (Croatia). Use |title= to do that.
  2. After the first Google Maps citation, you don't have to link to Google, Inc. Use |link=off to do that. There is a link to Hrvastke ceste that can be removed the same way as well.
Done as suggested.--Tomobe03 (talk) 23:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check by TCN7JM[edit]

I reviewed this at GAN, so I probably shouldn't review it here. I'll take the image check instead. TCN7JM 16:55, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that if I don't notice when you add new pictures to the article somebody will probably ping me, but for now, they're all good. TCN7JM 00:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Croatian wiki user living near the route was kind enough to snap a photo of D21/Ž5042 intersection (view from the D21, facing north) at an approximate position of 45.285855 N, 13.755102 E. I identified the Ž5042 from the image description, signposts and distances indicated there in the image, and confirmed the identification using Google Street View.--Tomobe03 (talk) 10:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That one's covered under CC-BY-SA 3.0, so it's good. I still (but now officially) support. TCN7JM 12:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Evad37[edit]

Review by Evad37
Infobox and lead
  • "Part of <E751 image>": Using an image in place of text causes accessibility issues - this is why MOS:RJL requires and {{Jct}} is programmed to output the image, followed by a textual equivalent (which is the used for the link). Additionally, the route marker icon should probably be at the beggining of the line, per the principle behind Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons#Do_not_use_icons_in_general_article_prose: "Icons should not be used in the article body...This breaks up the continuity of the text, distracting the reader." (taken from MOS:RJL, but it also applies here)
    • I am not sure if this is an actionalbe issue. The line and the image is produced by the infobox template (e-road= parameter), and I don't think there's anything I can do about it. Do you propose a specific course of action on that?
  • "Present-day D21 route was a part of M2 Adriatic Highway route after the Second World War": Add "The" to the start of the sentance
    • Added.
Route description
  • "After approximately five kilometres (3.1 mi), the route reaches a grade separated intersection with D303." - What type of grade separated interchange?
    • I think it would be best described as two-ramp partial cloverleaf. Does that make any sense? The intersection consists of the north-south D21 route crossing the east-west D303 via an overpass, with one ramp connecting the two in the NW "corner" of the intersection. The ramp forks in wyes as it joins the routes (both of them) allowing left and right turns and requiring traffic weaving - i.e. northbound D21 traffic has to take a left turn to access the ramp (and switch to westbound D303) and eastbound D303 traffic has to take a left turn to reach the ramp and switch to the D21 (both directions), once again taking a left turn if it continues north along the D21. The second ramp is in the SE "corner" of the intersection and carries northbound D21 traffic switching to eastbound D303. Just in case my description here is confusing, the intersection is located at 45°06′30″N 13°46′04″E / 45.108363°N 13.767843°E / 45.108363; 13.767843
      • That description is okay, just needed a bit more detail than only "grade separated", which isn't very descriptive considering the how many different interchange types exist. - Evad37 (talk) 02:29, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Description as "two-ramp partial cloverleaf" added.--Tomobe03 (talk) 08:32, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
History
  • "By 1830, the road network in Istria expanded to a degree that would not change for a century and a half" - seems like it should be "... had expanded ..."
    • Amended as suggested.
Traffic volume
  • "Since 2002, the road lost a significant portion of the north–south traffic as A9 motorway was gradually extended since 1991,[17] running parallel to the route." Two "since"s in one sentence doesn't sound right, try rewording
  • The table caption should mention the year the data was recorded, ie "D21 traffic volume (2011)"
  • The abbreviations AADT and ASDT aren't explained anywhere in the article - link the table headings to the relevant articles and/or add the abbreviations in brackets after the first time the full terms appear in the article text.
    • All done. I thought to fix the AADT/ASDT issue using {{abbrlink}}, hope that works for you.
Major intersections
  • The route marker image for E751 is different for the first intersection compared to others - is this intentional?
    I did that. I set up the Slovenia Jct subtemplates. ENWP didn't show any European shields on Slovenian articles, but DEWP showed that one. –Fredddie™ 17:00, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, was just checking. - Evad37 (talk) 06:23, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Other
  • The Commons box links to a non-existent category page
  • Dash style should be consistent (per MOS:DASH): The junction list uses spaced en dashes " – ", whereas the rest of the article uses unspaced em dashes "—"
  • How is the external link to Brijuni National Park relevant? Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject should normally not be linked, per WP:ELNO#13
    • All done. The EL and the commons box removed.

The rest of the article looks good. - Evad37 (talk) 16:08, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for taking time to review the article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I trust the above issues are addressed by now, I need your feedback on the interchange description though.--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – all issues resolved. - Evad37 (talk) 09:26, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck by Rschen7754[edit]

The spotcheck's going to be a bit difficult for this due to the language issues, so I'll take it. --Rschen7754 23:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Going to write a few notes while the third review is concluding. How our spotchecks work is that we check 25% of the sources, maxing out at 20. We check for plagiarism and for verifiability. If the selected sources are not available online, I ask for them by email - if there are no electronic copies then we choose other sources.
This spotcheck will prove to be a bit unusual as this is the first highway article from a country whose native language is not English. I don't think plagiarism will be an issue here for that reason, but we still need to check verifiability. Croatian is a Google Translatable language, so I will check there first and see if the material can be verified that way. If not, then we'll go from there - we can be flexible since the language issues can be difficult. --Rschen7754 21:05, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source 3: Good on V and CP.
  • Source 6: Map, good on V.
  • Source 11: should link to actual URL at [1] (will fix this).
  • Source 18: Good on CP.
  • Source 22: Map, good on V.
  • Source 23: assuming this backs up the other source used for the table, with the general highway layout.

Will work on this later today. --Rschen7754 09:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Rschen7754 09:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Source 23 is used to reference names, listed in "naziv izlaza ili čvorišta" (exit or interchange name) column of named interchanges along the A9 motorway accessed via the D21.--Tomobe03 (talk) 09:52, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Highways/Assessment/A-Class_Review/D21_road_(Croatia)&oldid=1140200179"