Talk:M-120 (Michigan highway)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: AdmrBoltz 00:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
{{GAList/check|hold}}
- Pass/Fail:
Comments
[edit]- Second Muskegon link in the Major junctions section should be unlinked per WP:OVERLINK.
- Done. Imzadi 1979 →
- Images would be nice, but are not a GA requirement. You may wanna include a copy of an old map for the previous routing of the highway. I would recommend the portion that links from Ohio Route 120.
- "In the aftermath of the reroute, the M-20 designation was moved
to runfrom Hesperia to New Era."- Done. Imzadi 1979 →
- "That concurrency was removed in 1978." link concurrency.
- "ran concurrently" in the previous sentence is already linked to that article. Imzadi 1979 → 00:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Passing --AdmrBoltz 00:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)