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

Reviewer:Dough4872 (talk·contribs)04:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (seehere for criteria)

1. It isreasonably well written.

   a(prose): b(MoS):

   • " Later, SR 364 meets SR 219, and moves northeast, creating the eastern side of the Grand Lake.", does the road actually create the side of the lake? I would use different wording here.
   • The sentence "The route meets at an T-intersection with SR 703, starting a concurrency." sounds awkward.
   • The history has several awkward sentences. Also it says SR 364 is a divided highway, which does not sound right as it appears this is a two-lane country road

2. It isfactually accurate andverifiable.

   a(references): b(citations toreliable sources): c(OR):

3. It isbroad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

   • You could provide a little more historical details in the lead besides year. Maybe mention highways or towns where the termini were at.
   • I'm pretty sure the history can be extended.

4. It follows theneutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It isstable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated byimages, where possible and appropriate.

   a(images are tagged and non-free images havefair use rationales): b(appropriate use withsuitable captions):

   An image of the road would be nice, but not required.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

The article has several major issues that need a lot of time to work on. Therefore, I will have tofail the article for now. It may be renominated once it is improved.Dough487204:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]