Talk:K-147 (Kansas highway)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 03:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- One thing I'm noticing is that there are some prose sections you use in multiple Kansas highway articles that may not always be the most relevant. Unlike K-156, K-147 itself was not part of an auto trail, and the connection to the National Highway System is tangential. I also feel personally that the traffic counting explanation feels and sounds a bit basic in your form; I tried to streamline it a bit.
- a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- The sentence "Rust in the bridge deck was not allowing the bridge to move freely." appears close to this Hays Post article and I'd suggest a reword. Otherwise there are no other copyvio issues.
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Nominator is the only major contributor to the article since expansion work began in April 2020.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- There aren't any media in the article, though I can't find any freely available media to provide here, either, unlike with K-156.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I'd like to see the "rust in the bridge deck" sentence tweaked before passing for GA, but it's pretty much there already. Ping me when this is fixed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Comments
[edit]- @Sammi Brie: I think I fixed the copyright issue properly. Let me know. Thanks, -420Traveler (talk) 15:22, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- @420Traveler: Yes, that looks good. Approving for GA. Hopefully the comments I've made here help improve your other Kansas highway articles! Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie: yes they will help me improve other kansas articles, thanks. Im trying to think of a DYK for this article if there is one, wondering if you had any suggestions? Thanks, -420Traveler (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- @420Traveler: Honestly, I'm having a hard time thinking of one too. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:30, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie: yes they will help me improve other kansas articles, thanks. Im trying to think of a DYK for this article if there is one, wondering if you had any suggestions? Thanks, -420Traveler (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
- @420Traveler: Yes, that looks good. Approving for GA. Hopefully the comments I've made here help improve your other Kansas highway articles! Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)