Talk:North Carolina Highway 79

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:North Carolina Highway 79/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 420Traveler (talk · contribs) 18:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review coming soon. -420Traveler (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  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 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
  • Infobox
    • Add 1934 map reference to established date.
So I have looked everywhere, no one seems to be able to find the 1934 North Carolina transportation map. There is a regional map (made by AAA I think) but it doesn't have NC 203 or NC 79 (along with many other minor routes that wouldn't make a regional map). NC 79 simply appears on the 1935 for the first time. Is there a way to get around needing two map refs?--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, what is the next map behind 1935 that is available? -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1933 is the next available. I went ahead and cited that everywhere you said to.--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Make south end say SC 79 at South Carolina state line.
Done, sorry about that.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead
    • Add length after "NC 79 is a"
Done. --Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • in the U.S. state of North Carolina running from the South Carolina border at Gibson to U.S. Route 15 (US 15), US 401, US 501, and US 74 Business in Laurinburg. I would end sentence after North Carolina. Then add "as a continuation of SC 79" after South Carolina border. Let me know what you think.
I did a little reworking but I think it works better now.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • A state highway between South Carolina and Laurinburg was first established in 1921 Where in South Carolina?
Fixed.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • along US 74 to its modern-day northern terminus at US 15/US 401 Add US 501 and US 74 Bus to end. Also remove "/" and use commas instead.
Fixed.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add some info about landscapes it passes through, whether it is mostly a 2-lane or whatever sized road, etc.
Added like a sentence because its not much, but let me know if it should be more.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Route description
    • Add links to first mention of each state/county/town/city/road.
I think I've done this to the best of my knowledge.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would remove second sentence, it disrupts the flow. Let me know if you disagree.
Yeah I agree, while I think it has merit to it, it's almost bringing the article "backwards" into South Carolina rather than forward.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • begins by running "begins" isn't quite the right word here.
Fixed this.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would change NC 79 begins to "NC 79's southern terminus is" since technically it begins at both ends. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, I changed it.--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • NC 79/NC 381 crosses a railroad change the "/" to and.
Easy fix, done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • crosses a railroad line operated by CSX Transportation add what type of crossing.
Added that it was an at-grade crossing.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 04:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • East of Gibson, the NC 79/NC 381 concurrency ends at an intersection with Hamlet Road. It says "east of Gibson" but in Major intersections it says its in Gibson?
Eastern Gibson was probably the best wording because its in the eastern part of the town limit. I changed up the wording, I think it sounds alright but let me know if you think otherwise.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, but just change dash to "and". -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed.--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • NC 381 continues to the northwest toward Hamlet while add comma after "Hamlet".'
Done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add comma after Little Pee Dee River
Done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • At the intersection, NC 79 and US 74 Business begin a concurrency to the east. Would "At the intersection, US 74 Business begins to overlap NC 79 as they continue east" ?
I do like this suggestion but I edited it slightly to say "At the intersection, NC 79 turns to overlap US 74 Business as they continue east". In my opinion, this reflects the fact that the road turns "onto" US 74 Business rather than the opposite occuring. But I hope the wording is correct.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The highways continue for 0.7 miles (1.1 km) through a residential area of western Laurinburg until reaching US 15/US 401/US 501 at diamond interchange. The northern terminus of NC 79 is located at the interchange. I would combine these two sentences. Let me know if you disagree.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think I combined them well. I agree the second sentence was a bit redundant.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, but change slashes to commas and add what happens to US 74 Business. -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed this and added the sentence.--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add National Highway System information to third paragraph.
Done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good but change NC 79 is included with the National Highway System to "NC 79 is included in the National Highway System." Also change dashes to commas -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed, also sorry, eventually, I'll get out of the / habit.--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add "vehicles per day" after each traffic value.
Done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good
  • History
    • (NC 203) was an original state highway that traversed from the South Carolina state line, at Gibson, to NC 20. In 1922, the northern terminus of NC 203 was located west of Laurinburg at the modern-day intersection with Springs Mill Road. Is 1922 supposed to be 1921? If not add that it was formed in 1921.
It is supposed to be 1921, but we don't have a 1921 map which is where the confusion came from.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • from the South Carolina state line, at Gibson, to NC 20 Add location after NC 20.
Done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • By 1926, NC 20 was realigned between Laurinburg and Laurel Hill to follow a more direct route. NC 203 was extended east to NC 20 between Laurinburg and Laurel Hill. Is there any way to combine these sentences?
I think I combined them as well as I could.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, but I'd change "and" to something else. -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I used "while" to signify they were at the same time, but that may not be the correct term.--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)--Ncchild (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • In NC 203 infobox, add 1920 map reference to established date.
Added.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • In NC 203 infobox, add 1934 map reference to decommissioned date.
    • At the time of establishment, NC 79 was a paved highway. Add 1934 map reference.
    • NC 79 first appeared on North Carolina state transportation maps in 1935 running from the South Carolina state line near Gibson to US 74 (modern-day US 74 Business) in Laurinburg. Add comma after 1935.
Done.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I suggest removing the "North Carolina Highway 203" and "Establishment" subheaders.
Removed them and made some slight rearrangements such as removing some bolded text.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Other
    • Add location to all references.
Done. --Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, not required, but are any images available on commons or on flickr? -420Traveler (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I am aware of. There are none on Commons and I checked Flickr but did not find any.--Ncchild (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem -420Traveler (talk) 05:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Final assessment
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North_Carolina_Highway_79&oldid=1204327951"