Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/California State Route 52

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

California State Route 52

[edit]
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.
Review passed with three net support votes. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

California State Route 52 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review

Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
Nominator's comments: On March 19, 2011 I was at the opening of the final stretch of this highway, which took over fifty years to build. I have taken the time to complete the research for a road nearby where I lived for the last four years, and I believe that it can go to FAC.
Note: this article is unique compared to a lot of our FAs/GAs in that it cites no maps for the history and relies almost entirely on newspaper articles. I've never done an article like this before; if reviewers could give feedback on this and on the level of detail, that would be helpful.
Nominated by: Rschen7754 03:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
First comment occurred: 03:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Review by Fredddie

I intend on reviewing this article in the next few days. –Fredddie™ 03:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox
  1. No opening date? No construction timeframe?
     Done --Rschen7754 04:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    On second thought, I could do without the construction dates in the infobox. Maybe we can work in some sort of summary/chart in the history section. –Fredddie™ 16:39, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I suppose? That seems nonstandard. --Rschen7754 08:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    How about a map showing the phases of construction in a different color? –Fredddie™ 16:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I can work on that later today. --Rschen7754 17:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
     Done and infobox parameter removed. --Rschen7754 04:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  1. Each sentence seems to have "SR 52" as the subject. Well, yes, this is about SR 52, but a little variance would be nice.
     Done
  2. "through the northern part of the city of San Diego." Could we shorten that to "through northern San Diego"?
    That could be misinterpreted; northern San Diego could mean North County San Diego. --Rschen7754 05:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Passes is used in quick succession.
     Done --Rschen7754 05:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. I think "It took over fifty years for SR 52 to be built, ..." would be better served lower in the paragraph, but I'm not sure where. Start out the second paragraph with "Plans for a route between La Jolla and Santee date back to 1959."
     Done --Rschen7754 05:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "With the" used in quick succession.
     Done --Rschen7754 05:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Is the bird still endangered? Maybe change it to "over the endangered Least Bell's Vireo songbird, which faced habitat destruction, ..."
     Done --Rschen7754 05:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "The road to Mission Gorge Road opened in 1993, ..." sounds like it's a connector road from SR 52 to Mission Gorge.
     Done --Rschen7754 05:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More to come –Fredddie™ 03:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All addressed. --Rschen7754 05:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Route description
  1. "...as the La Jolla Parkway"?
    See below. --Rschen7754 18:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The next sentence, "The road becomes a freeway as it intersects with I-5 before entering San Clemente Canyon, designated as Marian Bear Memorial Natural Park.[2]" seems oddly constructed. I don't like the dependent clause tacked onto the back. Let's rearrange it and make the clause a new sentence. How does this sound? "Before entering San Clemente Canyon, the road becomes a freeway as it intersects with I-5. The canyon is designated as Marian Bear Natural Park.[2]"
     Done --Rschen7754 19:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not an issue, but is it bad that any time I see a number, 90 million years in this case, I want to use {{Convert}}? :)
  3. In the lead, you should probably define the abbreviation to the marine base. I had to look it up.
     Done --Rschen7754 18:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Is the recycling center relevant to the highway? I'm not asking for it to be removed, just curious.
    It's pretty significant; only point of interest in that area, and relates to the history. At some point, there were actually offramps right to the landfill from the freeway, but I wasn't able to source that well enough. --Rschen7754 18:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. You mention the age of rocks a lot. Are they visible from the highway?
    Eastern part, yes, the road is carved out of them. Middle part:  Done Western part, the article does not say. --Rschen7754 19:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "...traveling through open areas in MCAS Miramar until past I-15.[2]" I'm not entirely sure you need this part of the sentence since you start the next paragraph with roughly the same thing.
  7. Do you have the elevation of Fortuna Mountain?
    Not sure where I would get that information sourced reliably; I believe it's on the sign though. --Rschen7754 18:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
     Done --Rschen7754 19:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Have you ever seen a bike path that wasn't bi-directional? That detail seems silly here.
    Not necessarily; bike lanes might not be bi-directional, and there could be two paths, one on each side of the freeway. --Rschen7754 18:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. I don't like interchange as a verb here. Traffic can interchange, but roads cannot.
     Done --Rschen7754 19:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Didn't you say SR 52 was the La Jolla Parkway in the first sentence? Why isn't it included at the end?
    It's actually not; clarified first sentence. --Rschen7754 18:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. –Fredddie™ 16:39, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All done. --Rschen7754 19:05, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What about #6? –Fredddie™ 20:02, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, rushing to get out the door this morning. Done now. --Rschen7754 08:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done, again. --Rschen7754 04:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History
  1. I know you prefer "constructed" to "built" and other verbs, but you used construct(ed|ion) 36 times and buil(d|t) 11 times in the history section alone. Thesaurus time!
    Yes, but it's a 2548 word history section; both of those combined make up about 2% of the history. Changed one of the constructed to built. If you can point to specific places where one word is overused, I'll fix it, but otherwise I don't see a problem. --Rschen7754 09:09, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "A ramp from I-5 southbound to Ardath Road westbound..." Southbound and westbound are adjectives, so they should come before their nouns.
     Done --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. In that sentence, instead of calling it "a cliff" you should mention that Ardath Road was considerably higher than I-5 and cite it to a topography map.
  4. "The San Clemente Canyon Road was completed in 1967, ..." were you going to say something else but changed your mind? "The" seems out of place.
     Done --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. The sentence about the dirt dumping should be revised so it reads like the dumping took place first and then were ordered to remove it later.
     Done but it sounds a bit awkward, and "dumped dirt" too colloquial. --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Was I-805 actually dedicated on March 20, 1972, or just scheduled?
    Scheduled. Unfortunately, March 20 falls into a gap in the newspaper archives. --Rschen

7754 03:12, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Iowa DOT had a brochure for the 40th and 50th anniversaries of the Interstate that listed all the dates the 10 routes here were opened. I was hoping Caltrans had something similar, but if they do, it's not online. All but one of the hits for "I-805 March 20, 1972" are enwp or AARoads. –Fredddie™ 14:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Did you surround the inflation numbers with {{Formatprice}}? I ask because "about $25000 today" has no number separator.
    Yes, but I'm not familiar with how to fix it. --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Turns out we needed the parser function {{formatnum}} instead. Fixed it myself. –Fredddie™ 04:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Do you think "The second phase of SR 52 from I-805 to 1.1 miles (1.8 km) past I-15 (then U.S. Route 395)..." would sound better if I-15 and US 395 were flipped?
     Done --Rschen7754 07:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. You should also mention when it became I-15. Maybe not an exact date, but a mention in transition can't hurt.
     Done Cited when it legally switched over; further details are for the I-15 CA article. --Rschen7754 07:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. "The governor at the time, Jerry Brown, ..." talking about Governors Deukmejian and Brown in close proximity like that sounds kind of like both were governor at the same time. Just asking for a little more clarity here. Maybe mention what year it was in the sentence I quoted.
    Changed; what makes it more odd is that Jerry Brown came back to be the governor. --Rschen7754 07:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I'm not familiar with the MTS or SANDAG acronyms, shouldn't you define them first? Yes, I know I could just click the wikilinks.
     Done --Rschen7754 07:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "As the highway was constructed on top of the Miramar Landfill, trash settling results in dips in the freeway, such as one in May 2007 that raised safety concerns. After a story on May 9, 2007 in The San Diego Union-Tribune generated complaints to Caltrans, the dip was repaired overnight.[39][40]"
    I would revise this by introducing the dips with the newspaper article. Then mention it was built over a landfill, and subsequently fixed by Caltrans. I started doing it, but I couldn't get wording I liked.
     Done --Rschen7754 07:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Went back and fixed a tense. –Fredddie™ 14:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. "By April 1985, a second route along Prospect Avenue was proposed by Caltrans, and earned the support of the City Council.[43]" You could change it to "By April 1985, a second route along Prospect Avenue proposed by Caltrans earned the support of City Council.[43]" It changes the action from proposing the route to earning support, which I think is the more relevant action since you're talking about the city of Santee in this paragraph.
     Done --Rschen7754 08:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. I'm not sure you need to use the definite article every time you mention City Council.
    Cleaned up a few references. --Rschen7754 08:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  10. However, if you talk about cities as corporate entities, they should be City of Santee (for example).
     Done --Rschen7754 08:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  11. "Residents" instead of "citizens" of Santee?
     Done --Rschen7754 08:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Shouldn't the L in "least Bell's Vireo" be capitalized?
     Done --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Shouldn't the picture be moved down closer to where you talk about the birds?
     Done --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  14. "SANDAG voted against building a full bicycle lane along the route in July 1989, citing the high costs.[70]" This seems out of place. Is there a better spot for it?
  15. Same with the military building a fence. Odd juxtapositions.
    With both of those, I've organized the history geographically, so that is the most logical place (same with the widening earlier). --Rschen7754 06:45, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  16. How did El Niño delay, well, I'm not sure what it delayed?
    Clarified. --Rschen7754 05:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Mobile homes are just that. Did you mean to say "sixty were occupied by mobile homes"?
     Done --Rschen7754 05:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  18. You should inflate the $525 million figure.
     Done --Rschen7754 03:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Undone, apparently it's the same due to rounding. --Rschen7754 05:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Future
  1. Something is not quite right with this paragraph, but I can't figure it out. Maybe someone else will find something.
Exit list
  1. Are we waiting for CALNEXUS to give us mileposts from SR 125 to SR 67?
    Yes; I checked on the latest edition, which came out since they opened it, and still nothing. Sigh... --Rschen7754 02:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this should complete my review. Nice work. –Fredddie™ 02:46, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All done, or replied to. --Rschen7754 09:09, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We still need to find out for sure if that March 20, 1972, date is official. But since we're at the mercy of our sources, I'm not going to hold up the review for that. I'll support. –Fredddie™ 14:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved issues from Dough4872 23:50, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dough4872

I have some concerns with the article before I can support it for ACR:

  1. Why is San Diego not linked in the infobox but Santee is?
     Done --Rschen7754 23:17, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. "in the US state of California in San Diego County", suggest reordering.
     Done --Rschen7754 23:22, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. "and the San Clemente Canyon Road serving as an early predecessor", what is this supposed to mean?
     Done --Rschen7754 23:22, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. The sentence "The extension to Mission Gorge Road opened in 1993, and opened all the way to SR 125 in 1998." could use rewording. I would suggest changing one of the instances of "opened".
     Done --Rschen7754 23:22, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  5. There seem to be a lot of instances of "SR 52" in the route description. Can some of them be changed?
     Done --Rschen7754 23:36, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. "California senators Pete Wilson and Alan Cranston", are these state senators or U.S. senators?
     Done --Rschen7754 23:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  7. "$2,000 (about $4.04 thousand today)" is there a better way for the conversion? $4.04 thousand sounds awkward.
     Done --Rschen7754 23:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  8. "$23 million (about $32.2 million today) was allocated by SANDAG in 1999 to purchase properties needed for the right of way." is there a way to not begin the sentence with a numeral?
     Done --Rschen7754 23:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. " Over 360 properties had to be acquired in order for the freeway to be built; at least sixty properties were occupied by mobile homes" inconsistent way of writing numbers. I would recommend changing the sixty to 60. Dough4872 23:07, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
     Done --Rschen7754 23:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Viridiscalculus

I intend to review this article starting in the next few days.  VC  18:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I realize it took me way more than a few days to get this review going. I will start with the infobox, Lead, and Route description.  VC  01:09, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox
Lead
Route description
  • I really like the geology/physical geography details. However, I think you should compile those details into a paragraph instead of having sporadic sentences. You will still need to have sporadic mentions of the geology for locations you can see stuff from the freeway, but an overarching paragraph would be more coherent for grouping the general details for the reader.  Done
    • I'm not exactly sold on this, since this would not group all the geology/physical geography details together because of the roadside landmarks. --Rschen7754
  • "intersects with I-5" remove "with"  Done
  • "The freeway is just north of" Change to "the freeway runs just north of" or some similar action verb.  Done
  • "Rose Canyon Fault that forms Mount Soledad" I do not think this sentence is geologically correct.  Done
  • "Late Cretaceous rock that is estimated at 90 million years old." Replace "at" with "to be"  Done
  • "SR 52 intersects SR 163, a freeway heading towards downtown San Diego." SR 163 heads both north and south from SR 52. The sentence implies the freeway only heads in one direction. I understand there is no access from SR 52 to northbound SR 163, but you should explain the interchange better.  Done
  • "SR 52 has an exit with Kearny Villa Road" Change "exit" to "interchange" or "junction" or something like that. There is another problematic use of "exit" later with regards to Santo Road.  Done
  • "...Pliocene sedimentary rocks that are estimated to be 10 million years old, visible from the freeway." I would adjust this to say "...Pliocene sedimentary rocks estimated to be 10 million years old that are visible from the freeway." Also, this sentence should not be in the middle of the paragraph because SR 163, Kearny Villa, and I-15 interchanges are intertwined; you should mention the intertwining.  Done
  • "with an exit to Santo Road" The use of "with" implies the interchange is an afterthought. I would change "with" to "where the highway has" or "where there is"  Done
  • "The freeway crosses the San Diego River and has an interchange with Mast Boulevard" One, these details are in the wrong order. Two, you make a passing reference to Mast Boulevard in the previous paragraph. I would make the full reference there and use a passing reference in the fourth paragraph, such as "East of Mast Boulevard, SR 52 crosses and begins to parallel the San Diego River."  Done
  • "SR 52 intersects with the northern end of SR 125, where traffic can continue south onto SR 125 or north onto Mission Gorge Road." This sentence is confusing. There are no ramps from SR 52 to northbound SR 125 to access SR 125's stub end at Mission Gorge Road. Rather, access from SR 52 to Mission Gorge Road is via half-diamond interchanges on either side of the SR 125 interchange, the second one indirectly via Fanita Drive.  Done
  • The fourth paragraph and fifth paragraphs are rather short. I would try to merge the fourth with the previous paragraph. I understand it would be hard to merge the fifth somewhere that makes sense.  Done

All done. --Rschen7754 08:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Diff is here: [1] --Rschen7754 08:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hope to address your replies above later tonight. In the meantime, I started reviewing the History.  VC  22:37, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Addressed remaining comments. There are a few concerns remaining.  VC  16:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed remaining issues. Not sure if you wanted to do this separately or with the stuff below, but here's the diff: [2] --Rschen7754 09:48, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing and we are done with the Route description.  VC  18:52, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Route description fixes are done.  VC  04:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History
I-5 to I-805
  • "However, the ramps to San Clemente Canyon Road were not opened that day since aluminum guardrails" Change "since" to "because"  Done
  • "Estimates indicated that residents of La Jolla would save 80 hours a year by using Ardath Road. A ramp from southbound I-5 to westbound Ardath Road was never completed because of a hairpin turn that would be necessary due to the towering cliff on the west side of I-5 that Ardath Road ascends as it continues to La Jolla.[18][19][20]" One, who estimated the time savings? Two, the second sentence sounds like synthesis. Did one of the two newspaper articles state why the ramp was never built? Three, ref 20 is a map reference, so it would not apply to the first sentence. Please be more specific in your citations at the ends of these two sentences.  Done
  • "On November 18, San Clemente Canyon Road was connected to I-5 when the aluminum guard rails arrived." You may want to add "installed" or similar after "arrived." Someone at FAC might be picky.  Done
  • It took some thinking for me to figure out that San Clemente Canyon Road was the precursor to the freeway. It is not clear from the History whether the road predates the designation of the legislative route or whether it was built at that time. Was it a two-lane road? Please integrate these missing details into the part before you describe its upgrade to a freeway.  Done
  • "In 1967, there was opposition expressed to the construction of the Soledad Freeway, because some citizens wanted the land to be used for a park, and because they did not view the freeway as "necessary"." One, who expressed opposition to the freeway? Two, whenever a quote ends a sentence, the end quotation mark should be outside the period.  Done
  • "Formal bids began in February 1969 for the first section of SR 52 in between I-5 and I-805." The word "in" is not necessary prior to "between."  Done
  • Is there a reason the dollar sign is wikilinked?  Done
  • There are no references for the 2012 inflation figures in this section and in later sections.  Done
I-805 to Santo Road
  • "however, construction did not begin for over ten years" in the first paragraph and "over 99 percent" in the third paragraph: Change "over" to "more than"  Done
  • "On June 30, 1988, at 5:58 pm local time" The exact time seems like an unnecessary detail. Did anything extraordinary happen at or before that time? Like, the San Diego Chicken breaking through a wall or something crazy like that?  Done
  • "A story on May 9, 2007 in The San Diego Union-Tribune generated complaints to Caltrans regarding dips in the freeway that raised safety concerns. As the highway was constructed on top of the Miramar Landfill, settling trash resulted in the dips. Following publication, the dip was repaired overnight."
  • I was skeptical, but you have the newspaper editions to back this up! The first and second sentences sounds awkward for causation reasons. The first sentence implies the dips raised safety concerns; it was the complainers (was it the newspaper staff or readers who wrote in?) who raised the concerns. The second sentence implies the settling trash caused the dips. I suggest: "In a story on May 9, 2007, The San Diego Union-Tribune raised safety concerns regardings dips in the freeway where it had been constructed on top of the Miramar Landfill. The dips, which were caused by settling trash, were repaired overnight by Caltrans."  Done
Planning for eastern portion
  • Inflation dollar values need to be referenced throughout this section.  Done
  • "By April 1985, a second route along Prospect Avenue, proposed by Caltrans, earned the support of the City Council;[45] however, there were concerns about the route requiring the demolition of many small businesses." There were concerns by whom?  Done
  • "In January 1987, the Santee City Council voted to commence a study of a more northern route, even though some believed that this would postpone construction." Who were these "some"?  Done
  • "In the same month, the mayor of La Mesa, Fred Nagel, started a petition drive supporting the extension of the freeway." La Mesa is not along the route of the freeway. Do you have any details on why Nagel supported the freeway through a neighboring city?  Done
  • In June, the CTC staff..." I suggest putting the year after the month because this is a new paragraph and it may be helpful to remind the reader that we are still in 1987. Same goes for the beginning of the fourth paragraph.  Done
  • "...regarding the San Diego River crossing, since construction might result..." Change "since" to "because" and remove the comma.  Done
  • "Other proposed routes considered by Caltrans included passing through a local golf course, which generated public opposition." Do you know the number of other proposed routes? Is this the golf course, Carlton Oaks, that is on the opposite side of the river from the built freeway?  Done
  • "There were concerns that the issue would affect the city council elections." Who had these concerns?  Done
  • "In March 1989, the Fish and Wildlife Service agreed to the project, on the conditions of altering the route to be east of the center of the town" The orientation is confusing. The freeway passes to the south of the center of Santee, right?  Done
Santo Road to Mission Gorge Road
Mission Gorge Road to SR 67
  • "with many homeowners along the south side of Mission Gorge Road being forced to move out of the way of the freeway construction." Do you mean the north side of Mission Gorge Road?  Done
  • "Twenty-three million dollars (about $32.2 million in 2012 dollars) was allocated by SANDAG" Passive voice. Changing to active voice also eliminates needing to spell out the cost.  Done
  • "The work began in May 2006, but increasing construction costs were another challenge faced in 2007." Is this the work on Forester Creek? Clarify. Do the increasing costs refer to the creek work or highway work? These should be separate sentences if they are not related, or combine the second clause with the last sentence of the paragraph.  Done
  • "taking money from a planned reversible lanes project on SR 52." Do you know for which stretch of SR 52 the project was planned?  Done
  • "Heavy construction" of SR 52 from SR 125 eastward to SR 67 began in February 2008, delayed by funding issues that were finally resolved in 2006 with voter-approved statewide transportation bonds." This reverse chronology is confusing. Can you rewrite the sentence to be forward chronological. It may be helpful to combine the budget woes of this sentence with those of the last two sentences of previous paragraph to make it flow forward chronologically.  Done
  • "Over 360 properties" Change "over" to "More than"  Done
  • "The official "ribbon cutting" ceremony took place on March 19, 2011 on the freeway at the Cuyamaca Street interchange (exit 17)." You should remove (exit 17) for consistency because you do not use exit numbers anywhere else in the prose.  Done
  • For the last paragraph, were there any reports on how traffic was impacted on I-8? You mention I-8 in the previous paragraph and follow up on all relevant routes except I-8.  Done

I have finished reviewing the History section.  VC  21:47, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. It's the end of the quarter for me, so it might take me up to a week to get to this. --Rschen7754 22:05, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All done. Diff (includes lead/RD changes round 2): [3] --Rschen7754 10:47, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done, again. Diff: [4] --Rschen7754 23:42, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I looked over the History changes and there are still a few things left to resolve. I am also going to look through the References section, check images, and check the Lead again shortly.  VC  04:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Should be good now. --Rschen7754 09:12, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History is done!  VC  18:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikilinking
  • I intend to check the wikilinking when I do my final sweep. Do you have a particular scheme (once per article, once per section, once per subsection) I should keep in mind as I check for consistency?  VC  04:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is only one duplicate wikilink noted from the duplinks script: San Diego is wikilinked twice in the Lead.  Done
  • There are three redlinks: Fortuna Mountain, Political Reform Act, and TransNet. Are the latter two likely to ever be populated? If not, I would delink them.  Done
    • Regarding the second, I got the impression that it was quite a big deal from the source. The third should be as well, as it was a significant initiative. --Rschen7754 22:56, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I brought up Political Reform Act because it sounds so generic. I did a search and it does seem to be the primary topic should an article be created, so it can stay. However, you should provide context, something like "a 1974 act of the California Legislature that did X, Y, and Z." A search for TransNet mostly brought up Transnet, a South African company. TransNet as used here seems to be a county-level thing; I do not think it is notable enough for its own article. I recommend removing the link and providing context.  VC  04:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Going back to the infobox, San Diego is linked once but Santee is linked twice. For consistency, either link each city once or link all of them.  VC  21:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)  Done[reply]
Images
  • The image at the top of the Route description has a very noticeable splotch in the center and several other minor splotches. Would it be possible to shop it?  Done
    • I can try, but my concern is the visible dashboard in the bottom. It is a fairly bad picture and I could consider replacing it. However, all of my photos are of the new portion... --Rschen7754 21:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • My main concern is the splotches because they are easily seen without expanding the image. The dashboard is more subtle and will probably not cause a ruckus at FAC. Are you going to have a chance to get to San Diego anytime soon to take photos?  VC  19:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the caption of the construction progress map, the route should be abbreviated SR 52 for consistency.  Done
  • In the caption of the Bell's Vireo, "least" should be capitalized, right?  Done
  • The images look fine with regard to copyright, but maybe someone else should have a look to confirm.
Exit list
Future
References
Spellcheck
Lead revisited
  • I do not have any specific comments, but I do have a general one. This Lead seems short and unbalanced compared to the rest of the article. This article has a short to medium-sized Route description and a long History, yet the paragraph in the Lead that summarizes the history is not much longer than the first one. Someone may complain about this at FAC. Can you try to expand the history part of the Lead?  VC  19:08, 1 January 2013 (UTC)  Done[reply]

Image review

[edit]
Spotcheck by TCN7JM

Spotcheck

[edit]

I'll do the spotcheck. It should be done either tonight or tomorrow. –TCN7JM 02:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source 40 (Bus transport feedback): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 41 (Problem with dips): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 42 (Dip repaired overnight): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 43 (Initial eastern portion planning): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 44 (Santee opposes plans): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 45 (Prospect route supported): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 46 (Petitioning the route): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 47 (River route is more costly): One word added to sentence for verifiability, no plagiarism
  • Source 48 (Town Center development): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 49 (Lakeside): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 50 (FHWA dislikes report): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 51 (Santee OK's northern study): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 52 (Route 52 study results): Verifiable, no plagiarism (only copied words are in quotes)
  • Source 53 (Route 52 decision near): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 54 (La Mesa): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 55 (Price comparison): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 56 (El Cajon): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 57 ("Outdated" report): Verifiable, no plagiarism ("outdated" is used in quotes)
  • Source 58 (CTC gets petitions): Verifiable, no plagiarism
  • Source 59 (Funding for Route 52 opposed): Verifiable, no plagiarism

There, that's twenty sources. Should be enough, no? Well, great job!

Support –TCN7JM 16:37, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Highways/Assessment/A-Class_Review/California_State_Route_52&oldid=1142558257"