Talk:Ontario Highway 59/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 05:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Floydian τ ¢
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 05:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
1: Well-written
- a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
.
- b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
![]()
|
![]()
|
Check for WP:WTW: None
Check for WP:EMBED:
Done
- The table is standard in such articles. Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
2: Verifiable with no original research
- a. Has an appropriate reference section:
Yes
- b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
very good Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
![]()
|
![]() Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:
|
- c. No original research:
Done
![]()
|
3: Broad in its coverage
a. Major aspects:
![]() |
---|
![]() Not all sources are accessible. Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Random check on accessible sources - Source 2 & Source 5
|
b. Focused:
![]() |
---|
![]()
|
4: Neutral
![]() 4. Fair representation without bias:
|
5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes
6: Images Done (Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416.)
Images:
![]() |
---|
![]() 6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
|
As per the above checklist, the issues identified with the lead are:
Route description in the lead "It connected ... en route." is very short and is not an accurate summary of the content in the body.There is a mismatch in due weight given to the Route description in the lead and the body.The lead is too short in comparison to the content in the body and should be expanded.
This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm delighted to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 22:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've added a bunch of info to the RD portion of the lede, and removed duplicate links as necessary. There isn't much to add to the lede regarding the history, but I stuck in a small blurb noting that the length tripled as a result of the changes in 1961. Let me know if you can see anything else that might be worth squeezing in. Once again, thanks for the reviews :) Cheers, Floydian τ ¢ 05:19, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
OK. It's looking really good now. Passing the article to GA status. Congratulations! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 10:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)