Talk:Washington State Route 22

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleWashington State Route 22 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.
Good topic starWashington State Route 22 is the main article in the Washington State Route 22 series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 21, 2010Good article nomineeListed
December 12, 2010Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Washington State Route 22/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Excellent description of the route.[edit]

It has an excellent description of the route. Reviewer: Allforjesus2 (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not disagree with the outcome of this review, but in the sake of completeness, I will do a full review of the article to confirm this. Imzadi 1979  22:20, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    There are some minor copy edits needed to clear up the prose. I've made them myself rather than list them here.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    As stated above, I agree with the outcome of the review, if not necessarily the process to arrive at that outcome. As such, I'm affirming the passage of the article. Imzadi 1979  22:51, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]