Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/U.S. Route 30 in Iowa

U.S. Route 30 in Iowa[edit]

Map of Iowa highlighting U.S. Route 30

U.S. Highway 30 (US 30) is a major east–west U.S. Highway which spans 330 miles (530 km) across the state of Iowa. It is the longest primary highway in the state and is maintained by the Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT). The route in Iowa begins at the Missouri River crossing at Blair, Nebraska, and ends at the Mississippi River crossing at Clinton. Along the way, it serves Denison and Carroll in western Iowa, Boone, Ames, and Marshalltown in central Iowa, and Tama, Cedar Rapids, and DeWitt in eastern Iowa. Cutting across the central portion of the state, US 30 runs within close proximity of the Union Pacific Railroad's Overland Route for its entire length. (Full article...)

Most recent similar article(s): U.S. Route 141: September 14 2020, Interstate 296: December 17, 2020
Main editors: Fredddie
Promoted: February 8, 2011
Reasons for nomination: Very informative article that covers an important part of the U.S. Route 30 highway system in Iowa. This article has also been a featured article for 10 years.
Support as nominator. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 14:02, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as main editor. I'd like to go through and clean it up a little bit, but I don't know if that will happen this month. –Fredddie ™ 21:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Fredddie. If a primary editor believes the article is not ready for the front page, then I trust their judgement. Also, I have issues with the blurb. The actual article is not linked and from what I can see, it looks like the blurb is just the lead's first paragraph copy-and-pasted rather than an overview of the article as a whole. Aoba47 (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Aoba47, Most TFA requests by other users i've seen here over just copy and paste the lead paragraph as well. If the lead paragraph of the article gives adequate brief summarizing information about article then it can be sometimes used as the blurb with minor tweaks albeit. I think the problem with this FA is that it barley receives enough attention. It has only gotten 563 views in the past 30 days per the page view statistics. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 22:35, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SomeBodyAnyBody05: From my experience, that is not true. The TFA blurbs I have seen were written for these cases (while they certainly used elements from the lead). They do not just copy-and-paste the lead's first paragraph because that would not provide a suitable summary of the article. It would leave out any of the information covered in the rest of the lead for instance. Pageviews are not the problem, so I am not sure why that was brought up. It does not matter if a FA has a low amount of pageviews as it can still be featured on the front page. Pageviews have no bearings on this whatsoever. The issue is that a better blurb needs to be written to provide a better summary of the article. Aoba47 (talk) 01:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, its main editor says it needs cleanup, so there is no reason to expose the FA process to the kind of criticism that is frequent at WP:ERRORS if an article is not TFA ready, particularly for a very old FA that has not yet been vetted at WP:FAR or WP:URFA/2020. And the blurb is off. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:30, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]