Talk:California State Route 244

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the California State Route 244 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

California State Route 244 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 9, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

U.S. Roads: State highways / California Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Topics	U.S. state highways
Locations	California
	This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.
	This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.
	This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:California State Route 244/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dough4872 (talk · contribs) 23:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
There should not be bolding in the history section.

"(That part of I-80 was Interstate 880 until 1981.)" should not be in parentheses.

Both done. --Rs chen 7754 03:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Reference 1 is a SPS and should be replaced.

Done. --Rs chen 7754 02:09, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed for "(That part of I-80 was Interstate 880 until 1981.)"

Done. --Rs chen 7754 04:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References 1 and 2 need publishers and accessdates and references 5, 6, and 7 need accessdates.

Done except for reference 1. --Rs chen 7754 03:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 4 is a dead link.

Link removed. --Rs chen 7754 05:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Can Legislative Route 288 be mentioned in the lead and bolded?

Done. --Rs chen 7754 03:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can some details about the physical surroundings be added to the route description?

Not done, and will not be done. --Rs chen 7754 03:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When was SR 244 built? This is not clearly mentioned in the history.

That's what the bridge dates are for... --Rs chen 7754 02:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest rewording "The bridges along the route date from 1971, a year after the bridges on I-80 to the west" to "SR 244 was built in 1971, a year after the portion of I-80 to the west. Dough 48 72 03:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still no; that misrepresents the source. Theoretically, the bridges could have been built in a different year. It may be impossible to determine when exactly the road was built; the bridge dates are our best bet. --Rs chen 7754 03:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You do not have a reliable source showing when the actual road was built? Dough 48 72 03:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would maps be any more accurate? --Rs chen 7754 03:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maps from the time period would work. Dough 48 72 03:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
An image of the road would be nice, but not required.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I will put the article on hold for fixes to be made. Dough 48 72 23:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to get to the rest of this as quickly as I can, but unfortunately the quarter has started again; it may take longer than 7 days. --Rs chen 7754 06:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time, I will continue to hold the article. Dough 48 72 15:40, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Everything should be good to go. I apologize about the SPS; I should have caught that before nom'ing. --Rs chen 7754 04:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will now pass the article. Dough 48 72 04:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]