Talk:Ohio State Route 605

Ohio State Route 605 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 so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 7, 2014. (Reviewed version).

United States: Ohio Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.

U.S. Roads: State highways / Ohio Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major 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.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Topics	U.S. state highways
Locations	Ohio
	This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.
	This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.
	This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ohio State Route 605/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Newyorkadam (talk · contribs) 22:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	No copyright violation, checked using Google. Prose is clear after fixes below.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Looks good.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	The only image, taken from Flickr, is legally uploaded. Image has the Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic license.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Image has a caption.
	7. Overall assessment.	Looks good :) Congrats!

Pre checklist comments:

The first paragraph contains no references

Lead doesn't need refs.—CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 22:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't hurt Newyorkadam (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

Quick glance shows no other problems

Okay.—CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 22:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

1. "Its northern terminus is also at a signalized intersection, this time with SR 37 approximately 3 miles (4.8 km) southeast of Sunbury."

Anything better than 'this time with'? Maybe "... at a signalized intersection with SR 37 approximately ..."

2. "The route was designated in 1937, and the northern terminus of truncated in 1995."

Did you mean "... and the norther terminus was truncated in 1995."?

3. I know you described to me how to use reference #2 (virtual "Transportation Information Mapping System") but could you possibly find another reference to back this up?

4. "The road then intersects Bevelheimer Road and crosses into Delaware County, in large fields."

I don't understand the ", in large fields". Please clarify.

5. " Few miles into Delaware County"

It should be "A few miles", right?

6. "Later, SR 605 ends at the intersection of SR 37 and continues as County Road 605."

'Later' is usually related to a time... Maybe try, "Soon after"?

7. "SR 605 was designated in 1937, following the alignment that it currently occupies between US 62 and SR 37, then continued north from its"

I think the 'then continued north' part is a little awkward

8. As per other highway articles (example 1 2 3) please add the length of the highway to the first sentence.

9. "SR 605 soon overpasses SR 161, and intersects Walton Parkway."

I know you mean 'overpasses' as in it goes over SR 161, but I think you should reword it a little bit to make it more clear.

Comments are done! Will do checklist soon :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

All comments fixed except the traffic one. Couldn't find anything else.—CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 23:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This line is very confusing with the past tense and present tense:

"SR 605 was designated in 1937, following the alignment that it currently occupies between US 62 and SR 37, and continued north from its current northern terminus along Delaware County Road 605 up to a junction with the US 36/SR 3 concurrency in Condit"

Please reword it. Thanks :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

I'll do the checklist tomorrow. As of right now it looks good :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 00:38, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

Passed! Nice nomination, congrats :) -Newyorkadam (talk) 21:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]