Talk:U.S. Route 131/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Dough4872 19:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   "Another large-scale construction project rebuilt an iconic section of the freeway through Grand Rapids in 2000." How is this iconic? The route description seems to overuse "US 131" and "the highway", can some variety in wording be used?

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):

   Can the full length of the route be added to the lead?

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:

   Pass/Fail:

I am placing the article on hold for a few fixes to be made. Dough4872 19:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Replies

1. "iconic" in the lead is a repetition of terminology used in the "S-Curve replacement" subsection, which itself is a repetition from one of the press articles.
2. I've made some substitutions, but I'm limited in what I can do for reasons of grammar.
3. I added it but honestly, 1) that's not a "major aspect" not covered in the article even if it's a detail missing from the lead and 2) it's just to the right of the lead in the infobox, which is part of the lead.

Your comments should be resolved. Imzadi 1979 → 00:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I will now pass the article. Dough4872 00:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)