This article has been years in the making; it uses tidbits of research collected from nearly 200 articles on individual state highways in Michigan in addition to books and articles about the state highway system itself. May 13, 2013, will mark the centennial of the state's highway system, and although time is short, I am optimistic that this article can be reviewed in time to be promoted and run as a TFA for that anniversary. Imzadi 1979→ 18:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I plan to review this article in the next few days, as I did not get to it at the A-Class review. --Rschen7754 18:12, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
U.S. and then US right in the first sentence.
I don't get the feeling that "size" is the right word here.
These may be remnants of decommissioned highways that are still under state control or segments left over from realignment projects. - This sentence gives me pause. If it was decommissioned then how can it still be under state control?
Michigan highways are properly referred to using the M and never as Route n or Highway n, but as M-n. - bit of a bold statement to not be sourced. Perhaps saying that the DOT refers to them with the M might cover it.
I'm still a bit uncomfortable with the way this is phrased - maybe "are referred to by the DOT"? --Rschen7754 08:58, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
In fact - needs comma after
In addition - needs comma after.
New paragraph - not sure why we need "roughly"
There exists - can we make this active? actually seeing a lot of passive in the entire section.
They - starting two sentences in a row.
Native-American - why the hyphen?
What are location streets?
Maps of the territory where - were?
The paragraph starting with "Townships" should probably be split.
The first roads were corduroy roads. To build these, logs of all sizes were placed across the road. - please combine
the state was prohibited from being "a part to, or interested in, any work of internal improvement". - is this what you're referring to in the lead? If so it needs to be a bit more specific.
The inflation citations should not have the primary citations after them - the other ones should be moved to before the parentheses.
Able-bodied men residing in a local road district were expected to pay his road taxes by performing 30 days of labor on the roads in his district. - agreement issues
Only 1,179 miles (1,897 km) of the 5,082 miles (8,179 km) of plank roads authorized by the state were ever built by 89 of the 202 chartered plank road companies. - not exactly sure what you're getting at here
national president - of what?
More later. --Rschen7754 08:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Changes made for the above. Please me know if anything still needs updates or tweaks. Imzadi 1979→ 10:09, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Early 20th century
Need comma after (MSHD) as that's an appositive.
Comma after Instead
When was the concrete roadway on M-1 laid?
improved (200 miles - stray (
jurisdiction - why not say state?
Will continue a bit later. --Rschen7754 08:58, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Image spacing could be a bit better - getting some text compression on my 20 inch monitor.
He was also opposed to the idea because the state had three east–west freeways under planning or construction. - comes off as choppy.
post war -> post-war? --Rschen7754 11:06, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Late 20th century
During the 1960s or 1970s -> and?
Additionally, both The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press opposed the project. - again a bit choppy
led by then-Chairman Carl Levin - need comma after
stated the project, "will cause - but no comma there
Reference/inflation ordering again
Lots of "project" - try rewording
Overall this article is very well-researched; it just needs a few minor issues fixed before I can support. --Rschen7754 11:32, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Support issues resolved; I checked mainly prose, though the article is well-researched and appears to be comprehensive. --Rschen7754 12:11, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I applied fixes for everything. Let me know if the first paragraph of the "Usage" section is better. I'm unsure what to do about the image placement; the text looks ok on my monitor. Imzadi 1979→ 12:06, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I did review this at A-Class, and I think it meets the featured article criteria. Therefore, I support its promotion. TCN7JM 19:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Support - I reviewed this article at ACR and feel it meets all the FA criteria. Dough4872 23:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I did an image review at ACR . –Fredddie™ 23:37, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Support. I stumbled here from my FAC, so I thought I'd review it. Go road and hurricane articles! The two FA's that most people are sick of :P
Do you have a measurement of overall miles as of 2013?
No, unfortunately I don't. I'm hoping MDOT would release a revised figure at some point, but they haven't. Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
"under a mile (1.6 km)" - this is awkward if it's under a mile. Why not give the exact measurement so the km isn't so exact?
I swapped in a little more precise figure, however there is actually an unsigned highway downtown Detroit (Business Spur I-375) that's shorter at around 882 feet, but I'll stick with the rounded figure of 3/4 mile from M-212, which is signed. Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps a dumb question, but is there any official (Michigan gov't) stance on "an M-" versus "a M"? I see the article uses "an M-", but I figured I'd ask.
Every MDOT document that I've seen that even comes close dodges this by using "I-, US, or M-" as their description of the state highway system, never singling out the individual letters. I just stuck with what sounds best and used "an". Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
"The freeway between Flint and Standish carries both the I-75 and US 23 designations for around 75 miles (121 km) as just one example of the phenomenon." I'd put from "as just one example" at the beginning of the sentence and add a comma. Otherwise it's a bit of a runon.
Implemented your suggestion. Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Any reason you don't say how much money the federal government provides in aid for roads each year? The current "third" is ambiguous.
The report didn't specify the amount, leaving it ambiguous, so I had to do the same. Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
"that criss-crossed the state" - is the "criss" portion needed?
"this provision took ended" - unless I'm misreading, the "took" isn't needed
That was a stray word left over from a previous revision; thanks for catching it. Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
"state highway commission and state highway system" - surely there's some way to rewrite that to avoid saying "state highway" twice?
How's "commission and system for state highways" work for you? Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
"Michigan was the first state to complete a border-to-border Interstate Highway in 1960 with the completion of I-94]." - since 94 connects with Canada, does that count? Also, what's with the bracket? Something missing?
Bracket dropped, but this is where that claim gets a little sticky. The part of I-94 from Detroit to Port Huron was originally going to be I-77, so when I-94 was "finished" in 1960, it only ran from New Buffalo to Detroit and didn't reach Canada. I've run into similar claims, but unlike those, the I-94 claim keeps getting repeated by official sources. (I-75 was "finished in the state" in 1970, but the reporter that said so in his article overlooked the fact that between Bay City and Grayling, I-75 was using the US 10 and US 27 freeways as a temporary routing while M-76 was still being converted for the permanent I-75.) Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
All in all pretty good, as to be expected from a Michigan road article :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, thank you, I do try to keep the level of quality up on my home state's highway articles. Imzadi 1979→ 09:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick change, all of your changes work well :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support – content represents a good mix of conceptual overview and specific examples of each aspect and anomaly discussed. I did a little bit of copyediting on the article recently, but made no major changes, and I think it's a fine article at this point. Juliancolton (talk) 03:34, 30 April 2013 (UTC)