Talk:U.S. Route 13 in Delaware/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 13:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this one over the next couple of days. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

This looks great overall. I have only a few comments:

"The construction of DE 1 necessitated the realignment of US before13 in a couple places." This sounds a little imprecise. Does a couple mean "two" here, or "a few"? If "two," I'd say "two"; if not, "several" might do.
- Changed to "two". Dough 48 72 01:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where you say "Prior to US 13", it's a little awkward, because it's the same actual roads, right? I think you mean something more like "before the US routes were numbered, or something."
- Changed. Dough 48 72 01:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"In 1950, recommendations were made..." By whom?
- Mentioned. Dough 48 72 01:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's all for now. I'll take a second read later, but it looks pretty good already.
- With those changes, I think it's good to go. Nice article. I'll think it next time I drive down US 13. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:13, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]