Jump to content

Talk:New York State Route 32B

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNew York State Route 32B 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.
Good topic starNew York State Route 32B is part of the State highways in Warren County, New York series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 3, 2008Good article nomineeListed
July 22, 2008Featured topic candidateNot promoted
August 10, 2008Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York State Route 32B/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    ".2 mi (0.32 km)" looks like a rounding error.
  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):
    Is there at least a rough estimate of how long the initial length of the highway is? If it used to be fairly long (> 50 miles or so) the map is misleading me into thinking this was a tiny road.
  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):
    An image of the current route is preferred, but in this case not necessary due to the short length of the road.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Few questions, but otherwise good. —Rob (talk) 03:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All things clarified and/or fixed. Thanks!Mitch32(UP) 10:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Passing, but a couple of suggestions - the article could use an image, and a real map. If you have one of U.S. 4 in New York, crop it to the portion between Northumberland and Hudson Falls and use that instead - it's better than the misleading(ish) map. I'd probably drop the existing map altogether - I don't even know where in New York that is! :-) —Rob (talk) 04:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was support merge. – TMF 07:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The routing of NY 911E was formerly part of NY 32B, and its history completely overlaps that of NY 32B. As such, NY 911E is already adequately covered in this article. – TMF 02:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the merge. 911E is just the state-maintained remnant of a former state route 32B. Since that route now has an article of its own, everything that one can say about 911E also applies to 32B. Separating 911E would only lead to redundancy in both route description and history. --Polaron | Talk 15:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No objection. --JBC3 (talk) 20:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, I fully support this merger for the same reasons as Polaron. Imzadi1979 (talk) 02:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll go ahead with the merge tomorrow if no one objects during that time. – TMF 05:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.