Talk:U.S. Route 59 in Oklahoma/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 12:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
I will get to this later today or tomorrow. Imzadi 1979 → 12:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
DABs and ELs look good.
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- I'd like to see more photos, but that doesn't impact the listing of the article. The map should have a caption though, I think.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- There's just a pair of comments that are possibly more like personal writing preferences. Imzadi 1979 → 02:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
Prose comments
- Constructions like "US-59 / 270 head" seem awkward, because I read that as a single highway with a combined name. If it were "US-59 and US-70 head" that would work to me, but otherwise that's one name, so a singular subject.
- "interchanging" as a verb doesn't work right, because it the traditional definition of the verb, the two highways would be changing places. I'd stick to something like "meets" or even "junctions".
- I have addressed both of these concerns. You may want to double-check that I didn't miss any of the awkward slashed constructions, however. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 02:36, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- And listed. Imzadi 1979 → 02:59, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
- I have addressed both of these concerns. You may want to double-check that I didn't miss any of the awkward slashed constructions, however. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 02:36, 14 June 2013 (UTC)