Talk:Pennsylvania Route 73

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Pennsylvania Route 73 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
November 26, 2007 WikiProject peer review Reviewed
November 28, 2007 WikiProject A-class review Not approved
January 14, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
Current status: Good article

A-Class review[edit]

This article had an A-Class review here. Normally, I'd add the {{ArticleHistory}} template and place the ACR link there, but it appears that ArticleHistory doesn't support any lower classes than GA (or at least failed GA), so I'll post it here. Feel free to add the link to ArticleHistory if/when it is added here and also to delete this comment at that time. --TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 23:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

There was already a parameter, so  Done. 哦, 是吗?(User:O) 00:06, 29 November 2007 (GMT)

GA review[edit]

I'll review this properly over the next couple of days, but two quick points for now

  1. I have no idea what the coloured rows in the intersection table mean, and there's nothing I can see to tell me
  2. MoS for units with conversions, I think is spell out first unit eg 5 miles (8 km) Jimfbleak (talk) 19:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Just hover over the colored row and it should (it's supposed to) tell you what it means. As for having some kind of key, that's a discussion for WT:PASH, methinks. --Son (talk) 21:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Also I noticed that a conversion template is being used for the mileage in the lead of the article. --Son (talk) 00:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Pre-review comments[edit]

There's not much wrong with this, but a few points to address

  1. MOS Conversions is quite clear - however the conversions were done, they need to conform with this
  2. A careful read through for accuracy and style is needed. A couple of early infelicities include "Outside of" (Berks County section) = "outside", and

"In contrast to mountainous Berks County terrain of 73," (Montgomery County section) - looks as if there's a "the" missing

  1. "at a massive intersection near Pennypack Park." some indication of why or how it's massive perhaps?
  2. I can't say that I'm totally happy about the table - I'm a very experienced user, and I didn't think to hover, a facility which I don't think is available to non-registered users anyway. However, since this appears to be the current project style, I won't make it a GA issue.

Jimfbleak (talk) 08:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Made some fixes. —JA10 TalkContribs 20:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, looks as if it's just MOS Conversions still to do before review. Jimfbleak (talk) 06:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
It looks like all of the distances in the text use the {{convert}} template. Did you mean that the chart should be changed, too? Coemgenus 14:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I think it's unreasonable for the chart to give metric, fine as is. The problem with the {{convert}} template is that its format contradicts MOS Conversions. In the first line, for example, it should be "62.51 miles (100.60 km.)", and wikified using non-breaking spaces between the number and unit. Jimfbleak (talk) 17:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I can't disagree with that. However, it should be noted that a FA review (possibly GA review, but I doubt it) on the PA 39 article suggested that the chart should give metric. That's why I put metric in the charts myself. (I didn't make the chart for this article.) But that's neither here nor there since this is a GA review (pre-review for that matter) and its more of a question of MOS or what have you. --Son (talk)

Good Article nomination[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:


The setup at the Tacony-Palmyra isn't a traffic circle. It's just a goofball setup to prevent a signalized intersection on the bridge. 73 eastbound goes around the loop, but westbound doesn't.

Multi Trixes! (Talk - Me on Wikia) 17:16, 22 May 2012 (UTC)