Talk:Pennsylvania Route 371

Pennsylvania Route 371 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 19, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Pennsylvania Low‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

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

Pennsylvania

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.

Article recognition:

	This article was the selected article of the Pennsylvania task force in July 2011.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pennsylvania Route 371/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Why does "23.45-mile" have the hyphen but (37.74 km) does not? Also, they should be linked per MOS, but no biggie.~~

Blame the Convert template and don't even ask me attempt to fix that. Convert around Wiki will crash.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could always write it out ;) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~"near the community of Union Dale in the community of Herrick Center." - you say community twice. Try rearranging for better flow~~

Done.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"A short distance later, Routes 371 and 670 crosses a fish hatchery and enter the community of Pleasant Mount, where the route becomes surrounded by development.' - two things. First, there is a noun/verb non-agreement, and you should specify the type of development

Changes made, both are technically cited to aerials not regular map.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...no, the noun/verb agreement is still messed up. "Routes... crosses and enter". I'm not sure what you mean about aerials, but where does the Yahoo maps say anything about a fish hatchery? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can toss the fish hatchery, but Yahoo provides the aerial service on their maps site so you can see aerial views of the route.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 19:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~"into a more moderate developed community" - the moderate is throwing me off there.~~ Also, I have a bit of issue citing a map when you're referring to the development of a community. That's something that should be in prose.

Changes made, both are technically cited to aerials not regular map.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It still says "moderate developed community", which doesn't make sense grammatically or in the other context. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~You have two consecutive sentences starting with "There," - try changing for variety~~

Done.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's still there... --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There found it.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 19:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~"making a gradual term" - do you mean turn?~~

Done.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~"The turnpike itself, fared poorly later on, with the abandonment occurring in 1853." - I'm not really sure what you're trying to say with the comma usage~~

Done.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Eighty-three years" - why is that written out? Numbers over 10 should generally be numerical~~

Done. (I don't actually agree with this MOS policy.)Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 18:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Overall the article feels slightly dull. Is there anything important about the road? What is its broader purpose?~~
- Anything on this? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Route 371 was once part of the main Newburgh and Great Bend Turnpike and because of the way PennDOT mangled the designation.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 19:01, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That works then. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I won't bother put it on hold, since I'm sure my concerns are easy enough to address. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:02, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, most of my comments were addressed. The only problem I see now is using a map to say things like "enters a forest area" or "surrounded by houses", when the map doesn't actually say that. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to pop in a comment, but if the hybrid/satellite view is used in the online mapping service (Yahoo, Google, Bing, Mapquest, etc) then yes, the map does indicate physical features like forests and residential developments because the roads and map labels are overlaid on top of a aerial photo of the area in question. Just a thought to ponder. Imzadi 1979 → 01:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I think that would be a short-term solution. However, I believe there is a fundamental project within the roads project with regards to citing images. I did a search, but I could not find any wiki policy on using images as sources. I do think there is a fundamental accessibility issue there, however. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted that addition yesterday afternoon so the VideoLog stuff is gone.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 16:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll be fine then once you swap the links for the hybrid view. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done.Mitch32^{(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?)} 21:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Failed verification

@Dough4872: you removed this failed verification tag[1] without providing an edit summary. Please demonstrate that the information can actually be verified from the source, I can't find much of it. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:04, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]