Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Assessment/A-Class Review/California State Route 75
California State Route 75
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This article has been promoted. -happy5214 09:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox |
---|
California State Route 75 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review
- Suggestion: Promote to A-Class
- Nominator's comments: This just passed GA, and since it's comprehensive, I believe it could go to FA. It's about the same length as the CA 67 one.
Note: I have a new map uploaded, but Commons is acting strangely tonight so it won't display.
- Nominated by: Rschen7754 07:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- First comment occurred: 23:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Review by Dough4872
[edit]Extended content
|
---|
I will review this article. Dough4872 23:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply] Comments:
Overall, decent article. Dough4872 00:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
I will now support the article. Dough4872 01:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Review by TCN7JM
[edit]
After Dough, of course. TCN7JM 00:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's all. TCN7JM 02:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
Okay, I see that that has been fixed. Great job on this article, Rschen! I support promotion. TCN7JM 02:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Image review by SounderBruce
[edit]Just going to reserve this. SounderBruce 01:40, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:California 75.svg -
PD, uploaded from Caltrans
- File:California State Route 75.svg -
PD, uploaded by authors (shields are also PD)
- File:San Diego Coronado bridge01.JPEG -
PD, uploaded from PD repository
- File:CA SR 75 Orange Avenue.jpg -
CC-BY-SA, uploaded by author
As the GA reviewer and seeing the images all coming up good, I support. SounderBruce 01:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Evad37
[edit]Resolved issues
|
---|
- Evad37 (talk) 07:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support, all issues resolved - Evad37 (talk) 05:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Spotcheck by Scott5114
[edit]Reference numbering from this version.
- 2: good, though I'm not quite sure I understand how exactly it's referenced in the RJL.
- It's more or less to corroborate the official length and routing of the route. --Rschen7754 09:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 8: wording is very close, not sure if this is an issue since the source is PD
- Fixed. --Rschen7754 09:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 11: source doesn't support that 6 miles of road were affected, it only mentions that 6 miles of curbing and 3 miles of sidewalk were to be installed (and that six miles may well be referring to the curbing on both sides of a three-mile segment)
- Done. --Rschen7754 09:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 14: good
- 31: good
- 34: Website appears broken or incompatible with my OS. I selected "1967" from the "statutes" dropdown and was given a blank one-page PDF, sections of which turned yellow when moused over.
- Emailing a screenshot. --Rschen7754 09:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- good, might want to use a more accessible link if one is available though
- I've been unable to get a better URL, unfortunately. --Rschen7754 09:05, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- good, might want to use a more accessible link if one is available though
- Emailing a screenshot. --Rschen7754 09:48, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 41: source only states that 3rd and 4th streets are truck routes, not that they're SR 75
- Removed. --Rschen7754 09:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 42: good
- 43: good
- 44: good, but "100,000 Expected to Greet Presidents" is probably a better source for the info
- 45: good, but might want to include information on another point of opposition: if passed, Prop N would have prevented Coronado from making changes to traffic while the periphery road was investigated
- 53: good
- 56: good
- 58: mentions nothing about a change in the toll rate
- Citation was in wrong place. --Rschen7754 09:18, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 61: good
- 65: may want to say "the San Diego Union-Tribune described the area as...". Doesn't back up the paragraph's first sentence.
- Done, and the first sentence is just to summarize the rest of the paragraph. --Rschen7754 09:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 68: good
- 69: good
—Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC), updated 09:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Some non-spotcheck notes that you might want to look into:
- "$533 thousand" is non-standard usage. Most of the time this would be written $533,000.
- Coronado mayor's name is McNeely, not McNelly, according to ref 45.
- "it would require approval from over 30 government agencies": thirty is such a short word you might want to spell it out.
- Fixed extra points. --Rschen7754 09:21, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't consider this a review, I just thought you might like to know. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Spotcheck cleared —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.