Talk:Delaware Route 3/GA1
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 22:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
DABs and ELs check out.
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Looks good.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Looks good.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Looks good.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- Looks good.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Some comments are in order before passing. Imzadi 1979 → 01:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- Lead comments
- This section looks good and satisfies the requirements of a lead section.
- Route description comments
- The writing and content here is acceptable.
- History comments
- I understand the need for precision, and since you apparently don't have annual editions of the state maps available, you've had to resort to the "by 1924" wording. Since every single year in the section is that way, you really need some variety in wording because its really getting monotonous.
- Major intersections comments
- Exit numbers in the notes for the intersecting freeways would be a nice touch, but otherwise the section is satisfactory.
- References comments
- Footnote 1 needs complete attribution information including an access date.
- The maps should state their publication years, even if that duplicates the edition. Some states publish multiyear editions, and some editions might be attributable to a specific publication date listed on the map. In short, the edition isn't a substitute for the publication year.
- Maps are missing section numbers. They should be added if the map has grid sections. If the maps lack them, of course, they can't be added.
- Overall comments
- Given how easy it is to add a KML, I'd personally prefer that you add one.
Looks good, so I'll list the article. Imzadi 1979 → 02:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)