Talk:New Jersey Route 38/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Hey Dough, you've been doing some wonders on this article; I don't see much room for improvement should this cross the threshold into GA status, although there are are few things.

Here's what I see:

  • The most glaring problem I see with this article, to tell the truth, are all the redlinks. This should be dealt with accordingly; per the redlink guideline, all redlinks that you feel you can create stubs for (that would be expandable and notable, rather than a permastub or something that would end up going meeting WP:CSD) you should. Otherwise, you should remove the redlinks that you cannot create stubs for.
  • According to the Route description criterion in the Standards portion of WP U.S. Roads, third-level headers are not necessary when discussing intrastate routes, such as this one. I personally believe that it helps out when organized in this way, so I'll leave the decision up to you.
  • Something that mentions how it services the Philadelphia metro area should be added into the article; I am not from New Jersey or Pennsylvania, and I only realized it was in the Philadelphia area when I saw "Camden" listed.
  • I understand that the lead can go into "considerable detail," but for an article this size I think three paragraphs is too much. I nominated a city article once with ten sections and placed it up with a three paragraph lead, and I got nailed for it. Is there anything that you can shave off?

Once those are fixed, in my honest opinion, I think this will be ready.

Good luck and good work, --Starstriker7(Dime algoor see my works) 02:58, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I have gone back and made the suggested changes Dough4872 (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Cool; it appears that all my concerns have been sufficiently addressed. I hope you do not mind if I call in a mentor to check my review over, and to make sure it is watertight; I am trying to get warmed up to the GA reviewing process. --Starstriker7(Dime algoor see my works) 04:22, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

You're doing well, Starstriker. I also think this article is ready for GA. The only thing that I think could be changed is this:

  • "The route is a four– to six–lane divided highway for most of its length and passes through commercial developemnt, residential development, and some farmland." I don't think that the endashes are needed.

Otherwise, great job, both of you. bibliomaniac15 21:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the endashes. Dough4872 (talk) 01:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Alright. I think you are ready; congratulations. --Starstriker7(Dime algoor see my works) 02:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)