Talk:Don Valley Parkway/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer:  Dough 48  72  00:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * "the Parkway" sounds colloquial, can another word be used instead? Can you also replace other colloquial expressway names?
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Citations are needed for the third and sixth paragraphs of the route description as well as the phrases "The entire length of the highway utilizes the RESCU Traffic Management System, which was installed in 1994." and "The message signs also frequently display messages to motorists, encouraging them to buckle up or avoid idling. The northbound CMS approaching York Mills is controlled my the Ontario Ministry of Transportation and as such, often displays traffic information for Highway 401 or 404." In the History, citations are needed for the phrases "The boxes were attached to Street lighting on the right shoulder with direct line for help from the then Ontario Motor League, now part of the CAA. After the advent of the RESCU Traffic Management System, the call boxes were removed." and "Metro had to build more extensive concrete retaining walls to hold the slopes cut for the road-building." The first paragraph of the Future section needs a citation also.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am putting the article on hold to allow for a few fixes.  Dough 48  72  00:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I am putting the article on hold to allow for a few fixes.  Dough 48  72  00:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I am putting the article on hold to allow for a few fixes.  Dough 48  72  00:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - I'm not sure what is wrong with 'Parkway'; it is part of the proper name of the highway. That seems to be a personal preference. It's capitalized. I have been working on the citation-related comments. The first paragraph of the 'Future' section will be a summary of the section. I have one other paragraph to add on expansion of the Parkway. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 19:26, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "The Parkway" sounds like an informal slang term and is not the most appropriate wording for an encyclopedia article.  Dough 48  72  00:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree. :-) I agree with Floydian that DVP is less professional. I would not want to write 'Don Valley Parkway' over and over. That would be tedious to read. When the whole road is referenced, the article uses Parkway, when a paragraph is about a section, e.g. route description, highway or freeway wording is used. I believe that is consistent through the article. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Further -- I've moved the past expansion and toll proposals to the History section and removed the first paragraph of the 'Futures' section. I think that's less of a problem. I've commented out the retaining wall sentence. I will find more information about what Metro did to fix the soil problem. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 21:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * "The Parkway" may be informal, but it used by multiple secondary sources to refer to the roadway. I've tried to reduce a few redundancies where possible, but the Parkway comes off more professionally than the DVP. In either case, it's usage was reduced significantly by Alaney2k.
 * As for the (former) first paragraph of the Future section, it was somewhat of a summary of the many proposals mentioned in the History. I think it is necessary to have it there, as the section begins rather abruptly as it stands. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  02:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There are still two uncited sentences in the route description, can references be added?  Dough 48  72  03:25, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I worked on the message boards paragraph. Could you explain what you think needs to be done? &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 15:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The sentences "Today the ramps also serve a winter maintenance yard and salt silo." and "The northbound CMS near York Mills Road often displays traffic information for Highway 401 or 404." need citations. Once they are added, I will pass the article.  Dough 48  72  00:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've tried to find sources for both with no luck. They are honestly not important enough to really even be mentioned, and were simply tidbits (at least the bit I added about the salt silo. I get many people that ask what those dome shaped buildings are for). I've removed both. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  04:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I will now pass the article.  Dough 48  72  23:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)