Talk:Utah State Route 279/GA1

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
The prose is generally very good (probably better than I could do). However, there are some minor grammar and MoS issues. First, should you mention in the lead that the road is in Utah? In the sentence, State Route 279 was constructed in 1962-3, "1962-3" should be "1962–1963", with an en dash instead of a hypen. Also, in the sentence, While in the colorado river canyon..., "Colorado River" should be capitalized.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
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):
Spectacular images!
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

A high-quality article, but there are some minor issues. I've put the article on-hold for those issues to be addressed. Good luck, Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow thanks for the fast review, and the kind words. I believe I have addressed your concerns, as well as fixed a couple of minor errors I just notices. Please advise if you have additional concerns. Dave (talk) 23:28, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, looks much better. Passes GA without hesitation. Good work! Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]