Talk:M54 motorway/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:M54 motorway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Looks quite good! &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 15:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review! As for the impact, I don't actually think there was any protests or anything. It is largely seen as needed, as it removed all of the through-traffic which was causing havoc through Telford. It is two lanes each way for the majority of the length, how could I clarify this? Just say it's dual-carriageway instead? I'll have a look at the concrete break up thing. I'll get on fixing these things soon. Asdfasdf1231234 ( talk ) 18:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I've added a negative impact (air quality), I can't find any other negatives though. Also clarified the intro (with the lanes thing), and replaced the could've. Hope that addresses everything, Asdfasdf1231234 ( talk ) 21:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've crossed out the addressed concerns. I still would like to know what sort of technical disaster would befall concrete that would require a repaving not two years after the start of service. :-) &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 00:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I double checked the source and it seems it broke up because they built it with inflexibile concrete upon a mined/unstable area initially. God knows why they did that. Probably tight on the money! Asdfasdf1231234 ( talk ) 08:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, that explains it. Bad surveying. Thanks for looking that up! &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 15:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help! I've taken the liberty of updating the GA template so it links to this page and specifies it's a transport article. Asdfasdf1231234 ( talk ) 19:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)