The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Out of all the freeways in Ontario, Highway 405 likely has the simplest history, and as such is the shortest of the 400-series articles. Coincidentally, it was also my first road GA. A perfect candidate for the shortened month of February!
I will review this article. Dough4872 01:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:
In the lead, maybe you should mention that I-190 continues into New York.
Is it really important to mention the speed limit in the lead?
"The additional lane provided along this section is for the queueing of trucks", should specify this is the eastbound lane.
"It then passes over the Niagara Parkway and begins to cross the Lewiston–Queenston Bridge" sounds awkward. I would change "begins to cross" to "heads onto".
Again, should mention I-190 continues into New York in the Route description.
Also, you should mention the body of water at the U.S. border in the lead and Route description.
You have inconsistent date formatting in the History.
Does the former interchange need to be included in the exit list? Usually, I wouldn't bother to include them.
As with several other Ontario articles (such as ON 61, ON 71 and ON 402) that connect to highways at the U.S. border, I have a concern with the alignment of the I-190 shield in the exit list. This should be fixed the same way it was in those articles. Dough4872 05:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Added
That's usually the only spot it tends to get a mention, I've removed it though.
Done
Done
Yuck! DMY formatting. All fixed :D
I include former interchanges from 50 years ago if I can, it's a good place to mention those details in longer articles (ie 401) especially. If the info's there why not after all?
Yeah I tried to get some commentary on that at MOS:ICONS but got no response. You're killing me, but fixed.
Thanks for the review! - Floydianτ¢ 02:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good work! Dough4872 02:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd use {{commons category-inline}} at the top of your ELs as to not stack the KML and commons cat boxes, but thats more of a personal preference. --AdmrBoltz 13:34, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Added sources and image location to the two images. I personally like them stacked, but I've fixed Attached KML so that it is the same width as the commons box, which looks much better. - Floydianτ¢
Images check out. --AdmrBoltz 19:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Rschen7754
Preliminary checks
The formatting for ref 11 seems off - shouldn't NYT be what is in italics?
Lead
In the US, we generally say Interstate 190 (I-190) the first time, and then I-190 everywhere else.
Why italics?
Last sentence not cited, and the information is not found elsewhere.
Route description
The primary purpose... notable.... seems a bit like editorializing.
This completes the review. --Rschen7754 00:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First issue fixed... had NYT as the publisher instead of work. Fixed the I-190 issue. Changed italics to boldface as it should be. Added OPP info to RD with a citation. Finally, I've reworded those two sentences to make it less essay-like. Cheers, Floydianτ¢ 01:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support issues resolved. --Rschen7754 01:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It then crosses the Niagara River, where it crosses – avoid using crosses twice in the same sentence
... is not subject to alternative, federal, administration, ... – sentence would flow better as "... is not subject to federal administration, ..."
named the General Brock Parkway – why the italics?
Toll rates – external should not normally be placed in the body of an article per WP:EL
Please be consistent with using either a dash (-) or endash (–) for Lewiston–Queenston Bridge
Infobox – caption for image?
All fixed, except the first issue. I'm not sure where I can find a text-based source for this... it's completely standard everyday practice to pronounce the 400-series highways with the "oh" instead of as a three digit number, but only in speech. Any thoughts? - Floydianτ¢ 00:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe tv or radio news reports or stories? Not sure what the CBC or other Canadian broadcasters are like with putting stuff online, but you might find something. Otherwise, is the pronunciation actually necessary? It's not mentioned in the FA article Ontario Highway 402. - Evad37[talk] 02:37, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Meh... it'd be too difficult to find. There is one I found for the "four-oh-one", but that's all it mentioned :/ Oh well. I just removed it until such time as one can be found. - Floydianτ¢ 03:21, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Evad37[talk] 04:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Spotcheck by Rschen7754
I will take the spotcheck. --Rschen7754 02:11, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Source 9: Good on V and CP.
Source 11: Good on V and CP... but is this a reliable source?
Glad this one is finally right on the money without mistakes. Cheers, Floydianτ¢ 23:33, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, sounds good, and the spotcheck is now complete. --Rschen7754 23:34, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
