Talk:U.S. Route 50/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:
  • History "US 50, part of the original U.S. Highway system, was a major east–west route because 50 ends in 0." Please explain the signifigance of this fact to readers who do not realize that numbered highways follow a pattern of east-west even, north-south odd. This is stated a little too matter-of-factly for the uninformed reader to grasp this concept. Also, "was" implies US 50 does not exist anymore. A better statement would be "Before the creation of the interstate highway system, US 50 was a major east-west route. Numbered highways in the United States follow a pattern of odd numbers for north-south routes and even numbers for east-west routes, hence the designation of "50" for this route." or something to that effect.
  1. B. MoS compliance:
    Introduction is too short.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    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:
    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 16:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have made changes to the article as requested. Dough4872 (talk) 04:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been improved and kept as a Good Article. --ErgoSumtalktrib 13:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]