Talk:U.S. Route 62 in Oklahoma/GA2

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Prose is much better from previous review.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The RD needs citations to a current state map or Google Maps.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The history could be expanded with some of the reroutings due to the Interstates at the very least. Are there old ODOT maps that show pavement conditions. MDOT maps showed what sections were gravel, so at least you could note when it was completely hard-surfaced in the history.

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:

   I'm placing this article on hold for 7 days to see if the concerns above can be rectified.Imzadi1979 (talk) 22:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

   Passing article. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)