Talk:Interstate 295 (Delaware–Pennsylvania)/GA3

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

Reviewer: Rschen7754 (talk · contribs) 16:48, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * To address the previous review, it was a 30-second sweep to catch self-published sources, so I don't think it prevents me from doing this review.


 * Sources 5 and 11 are deadlinks.
 * Fixed.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I can't tell what source 42 is.
 * Fixed.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The lead seems a bit slanted towards the history, when the RD is longer than the history.
 * Cut some information.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In the first paragraph you overuse "the route".
 * Reduced usage.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In the second paragraph you overuse "portion".
 * Reduced usage.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Route description
 * "large interchange" - be more specific or cut it out entirely
 * Remove "large".  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * "heads east-southeast industrial areas" - something missing
 * Added word.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Later on, overuse of "development" and "interchange"
 * Cut back usage of both words.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * "As part of the Interstate Highway System, the entire length of I-295 is a part of the National Highway System." - perhaps this should go in an introduction to the RD, like Interstate 8 has it.
 * Added mini-lead to RD.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * History
 * Please check to make sure that you don't start consecutive sentences with the same words.
 * Fixed.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Future
 * The northern portion of I-295 will be affected by the Pennsylvania Turnpike/Interstate 95 Interchange Project in Bristol Township, Pennsylvania. - I feel this sentence is bland and says almost nothing.
 * Removed sentence.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Should be a pass after this is resolved, but please go through and check for other overused words and extraneous details. --Rschen7754 18:20, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, I have replied above.  Dough   4872   13:24, 1 June 2015 (UTC)