Wikipedia:Peer review/Utah State Route 103/archive1

Utah State Route 103

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am looking for comments before I send this to FA.

Thanks, Admrboltz (talk) 16:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - Yohhans^talk 20:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC) - Will be looking at this with an eye on the FA requirements.[reply]

1a well-written - A few issues here.

"short" is used in both the first and second sentence in the lead. Try to avoid redundancies.
- Done --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It serves as a short connector between SR-126 in downtown Clearfield, Interstate 15 (I-15) and Hill Air Force Base. - This sentence is confusing. Assuming I understand it correctly, I suggest rewording it to, "It branches off from SR-126 in downtown Clearfield, Utah and extends east to Interstate 15 (I-15), terminating at Hill Air Force Base."
- Correct, changed to your wording. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
coinciding with the construction of I-15 through the area. - "through the area" is redundant.
- Deleted. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SR-103 begins at anthe intersection of Main Street (SR-126) and 650 North
- Done --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SR-103 begins at an intersection of Main Street (SR-126) and 650 North, and begins a gentle northerly turn, crossing over the Davis–Weber Canal and meets up with the eastern interchange with I-15. - and... and... and... Avoid run-on sentences. A full stop should come after "Canal" and then the second clause forms a new sentence.
- Done --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After passing underneath the interstate, - How is it passing underneath the interstate? Under an overpass maybe? Also, this is a run-on sentence that reads very awkwardly. It needs to be restructured and (probably) broken into two sentences.
- Done --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Directly northeast ~~of SR-103~~, Arsenal Road passes near but does not connect to the highway. - If so, why is it not on the map? Is it just a map of Routes and Highways? And if that is the case, why is SR-107 not labeled? Or SR-108? Or SR-37? etc... Also, don't you mean 6th street instead of Arsenal Road?
- Wow... Google has completely changed all of the map in that section. Rewritten. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Nice to know Google is keeping up to date on things. :) Rewrite looks good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
the eastern terminus, restricting access to authorized personnel visiting or working at Hill Air Force Base. → the eastern terminus, and only grants access to authorized Hill Air Force Base personnel.
- Done --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After the control gate the road connects - You just said the access gate served as the terminus. Which is right? Does it extend beyond the gate or does it not?
- Removed --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
which has a break in the route just north of the gate. - I cannot figure out what this means. Is it saying that SR-103's route is broken up by the gate?
- No longer needed, as the street names have been changed since last month... --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, ok. Revision looks good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On average, in 2007 22,525 cars traveled - Did that many cars cross in that year? Or was it an average amount of cars per day? week? month? Average amount per year as of 2007?
- AADT is an annual average per day. Updated wording --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Gotcha. I finally understood when I hovered over the link. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
between Hill Air Force base and I-15 - Still confused on this. As far as I can tell, there is maybe 100 yards or less between the overpass of I-15 and the air force base. Did you mean between the air force base and SR-126? Why not just say, "For the year 2005, a daily average of 21,275 cars traveled along SR-103, a number that remained consistent for 2006 (22,215) and 2007 (22,525).[4] Three percent of this traffic was composed of trucks.[5]"
- The measurement point is 1/2 way between I-15 and H AFB. There is no counter on the otherside of the highway. Changed wording, explained AADT. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looks good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SR-103 is one of only four Utah state highways that connect to Hill Air Force Base, the others being SR-97[6], SR-168[7] and SR-232[8], and has the second lowest average daily traffic, only higher than SR-168[4]. - I would suggest tacking this on to the end of the first paragraph.
- done --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
US-91, before the formation of I-15, was the major thoroughfare between California and the Canadian border in Montana, and connected the town of Clearfield, and residents along the new interstate highway to Hill Air Force Base. - Run-on sentence.
- Broken up and cited. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)\[reply]
  - Good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
except for the name of the road on which it is routed. - Not sure what "on which it is routed" means. Also, this is the second use of "route" in this sentence.
- Clarified --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Originally, SR-103 was routed along 600 North, - Same as above.
- Clarified --Admrboltz (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Good. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1b comprehensive

The base as of 2002 was the fifth largest employer in the state of Utah, and second largest employer which is neither the state government or a state-funded higher education institution.[9] - Has nothing to do with the history of the road. If you're providing context for why the road is so important, state as much. Otherwise, it just looks like a random fact.
- Suggestions? I'm coming up with something like "SR-103 serves as a connection to the second largest non-state government or state funded higher education institution" but I am not sure if that flows well. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - How about simply changing the previous sentence to, "SR-103 serves the important function of connecting the town of Clearfield, and residents along the new interstate highway to Hill Air Force Base."? - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1c factually accurate

US-91, before the formation of I-15, was the major thoroughfare between California and the Canadian border in Montana, - Needs a citation.
- This was incorrect, I have fixed and cited this. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fantastico. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
0.225 Arsenal Road Eastern terminus - You stated in Route description that it never connects to Arsenal Road... how is it then its terminus? I thought it terminated upon reaching the base?
- Changed because of the names of the roads have changed since I last viewed the map --Admrboltz (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - K. Everything looks in order now. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2 WP:MOS

Link uncommon terms in the article. For example, SR-126 should be linked in the body. It is already linked in the lead, yes, but a good rule of thumb is to treat the lead and the body as two separate articles. So even if an item is linked once in the lead, it should still be linked in the body.
- Linked --Admrboltz (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2b appropriate structure

The entire route is located in Davis County. - Probably should go in Route description
- Moved, the placement of this is suggested in WP:ELG as its optional to list the county if only one county is crossed.

2c consistent citations

Make sure all your references immediately come after punctuation. For example, "SR-97[6]," should be "SR-97,[6]" and "SR-168[4]." becomes "SR-168.[4]".
- Done, I'm usually pretty good about these… --Admrboltz (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3 Images

Missing a date on the image creation of Image:Utah Route 103 map.png.
What does the yellow signify on the map? A key would be helpful.
Also would be helpful if you marked the location of Clearfield. I see you did in an older version of the file, why remove it?
Very helpful, but not mandatory, would be a photo of the highway.
- (all in one) - The map is incorrect, I have asked the creator to fix it, as well as label the city and the surrounding routes. It will only show state and interstate routes, not local roads. A picture has been requested on the Talk page, but as I don't live near there, and its such a small route, I am not sure if anyone will snap a picture of it. I have already searched flickr for appropriate images, but did not find any. --Admrboltz (talk) 01:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok. I look forward to the new map! The current one is lacking in my humble opinion. And again, no worries about the photo. I know you've been asked about it three times now (if not more). I just figured I'd remind you that it would be good to have a picture. ;) - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, for being so nitpicky, but you did say you wanted it ready for FAC. :) Hope the review has helped. - Yohhans^talk 20:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! You work fast! And do a great job, too. The article looks top-notch now. I'd be happy to throw my support into the ring when you take this to FAC. - Yohhans^talk 02:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]