Talk:Mitchell Freeway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMitchell Freeway 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 1, 2013Good article nomineeListed
May 26, 2013WikiProject A-class reviewApproved
Current status: Good article

Murray St entrance[edit]

When entering the freeway southbound from Murray street, West Perth you dont access Elder street, traffic approaching from Elder street merges on the ramp. IMHO Murray st should be listed as a separate enterance. Gnangarra 10:45, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed "Elder Street" to "Murray Street / Elder Street". I have listed them together as they use the same ramp (after merging) and are at the same location. - Evad37 (talk) 11:39, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interchange types[edit]

I'd class the Narrows interchange with Mounts Bay Road as a very heavily modified folded-diamond interchange, although that may be clutching at straws. Would you agree or is the interchange too unique to classify in this article? Outrune (talk) 12:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it should be classified as "a very heavily modified folded-diamond interchange". It would seem like hybrid interchange would be more appropriate. According to Interchange (road), "Hybrid interchanges use a mixture of interchange types and are not uncommon. Their construction can consist of multiple interchange designs such as loop ramps, flyovers and roundabouts." - Evad37 (talk) 06:02, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mitchell Freeway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: HueSatLum (talk · contribs) 02:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm wrong about any changes, let me know. I will complete the review sometime within the next few days.

Thanks for starting this review. I've made most of the suggested changes below. - Evad37 (talk) 10:30, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lead

Looks good.

History
 Done
  • Per MOS:NUM, "forty three thousand sand drains" → "43,000 drains"
 Done
  • "Narrows interchange" → "Narrows Interchange"
 Done
  • What does "CBD" stand for?
 Done (central business district)
 Done
  • Add {{convert}} for "3 km" and "4 km".
 Done
 Done
 Done
Future works
  • "$30m" → "$30 million"
 Done
  • "The resulting congestion in the afternoon traffic peak increases the chances of rear-end crashes as well as driver frustration." should not be in present tense.
Not sure about this one... past tense (ie "... increased ...") doesn't seem appropriate as this applies the current situation, and will do so until construction is completed. I'll have a go at rewording/fixing this up later, or let me know if you have any ideas.
You're right, my apologies.
Route description
 Done (linked to Segregated cycle facility#Off_road:_sidepath_.2F_shared-use_footway)
  • "Located just north of the Narrows Bridge, on the eastern edge of Kings Park, is the Narrows Interchange" → "The Narrows Interchange is located just north of the Narrows Bridge, on the eastern edge of Kings Park."
 Done
Exits and interchanges

Looks good

References
  • Ref #17 is a dead link.
 Done: Marked as {{dead link}} per WP:LINKROT. Also added another ref.
  • Ref #2 lacks an accessdate.
 Done
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Good following changes above.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Properly sourced from reliable sources
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Very detailed route description
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Neutral, not a very contriversial topic
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Very stable
  6. 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):
    Good historic images
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    The article is very informative and well-written. Nice job! ⋘HueSatLum ? ❢⋙ 20:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mitchell Freeway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mitchell Freeway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mitchell_Freeway&oldid=1214871536"