Jump to content

Talk:United States Numbered Highway System/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Reassessment

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This review is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Unreviewed
    B. MoS compliance:
    Introduction is too short. See WP:LEAD for more info.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    Large portions of the article are uncited.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    I only skimmed through the article, so citations might not be the only problem. Prose issues are generally minor, however, missing citations is a major problem and if this is not resolved the article will definitely be de-listed. Article will be placed on hold until issues can be addressed. If an editor does not express interest in addressing these issues within seven days, the article will be delisted. --ErgoSumtalktrib 17:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will get around to fixing the article. Dough4872 (talk) 01:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I actually forgot that I reviewed this one, so I didn't really notify anyone about it. I'll extend the hold time another week. --ErgoSumtalktrib 01:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have finished making the requested improvements to the article. Dough4872 (talk) 21:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm impressed. Article kept. --ErgoSumtalktrib 22:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]