Talk:Eisenhower Tunnel/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Remember to state that it is the United States.
The lead states it is among the last parts of the Interstate to be completed, but doesn't say which year.
Perhaps mention the number of lanes in the lead.
I think you are doing a number of that/which errors—check out the rules, they confuse even me, and I wasn't aware of it until a featured nomination of mine. Those types of errors are beyond the scope of GA.
When writing in past tense, use "were" instead of "would be".
When converting currency, don't say "today", say "as of [year]".
Ref 3 needs a title.

Nice, well-written and interesting article. Some small things, so I'm placing it on hold. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I will try to get to these this weekend. Dave (talk) 17:33, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenikk, can you specify what types of errors are found in the article and how they could be fixed? Thanks. --Pzoxicuvybtnrm 22:18, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenikk, thank you for the review and kind words. I believe between Pz and my fixes we have fixed everything you have noted. I also am not skilled with grammar; however, I have noted the overuse of the word that and which. I have removed/fixed some instances. Please advise if you find any more issues. Thanks again. Dave (talk) 06:58, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pz: the list was complete for all the non-good things I found. All in all, above average for a GA nomination. By the way, I may have faulted in the currency thing, if you are using {{inflation}}, then it is okay to use that syntax (I was at the time not aware of this automatic process). Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 08:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]