Talk:Business routes of Interstate 69 in Michigan/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Dough4872 (talk · contribs) 00:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- The phrase "a two-lane highway with limited access on the east of the city" needs to be reworded. I assume you can change the first part to two-lane limited-access highway.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- How many lanes wide are the portions of the Lansing business route?
- The sentence "It is the longest business route in the state of Michigan at a length of over 14 1⁄2 miles (23.3 km)." better belongs in the first couple of sentences of the Lansing business route section rather than in the middle of the history.
- Is it really necessary to mention the terminus of the divided highway section in the major intersections table of the Lansing business route?
- The description of the Port Huron business route doesn't mention M-25 although it is mentioned in the major intersections table.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- 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):
- Pictures of the business loops would be nice to have. Also, It may help to have a map in the infobox showing where all the business routes of I-69 in Michigan are. However, the lack of neither will hold this article up.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
I will place the article on hold for a few issues to be addressed. Dough4872 00:46, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Dough4872: tweaks applied. I think the divided-highway section should be left in the table. U.S. Route 131 notes where it has a divided highway segment, and MDOT notes it in the PRFA. Imzadi 1979 → 02:31, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- I will pass the article. Dough4872 02:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)