Talk:New Jersey Route 35/GA1

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

I will be reviewing this article and expect to have comments by the end of the day. --Polaron | Talk 15:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Lead -- Generally well-written and summarizes the main body of the article well. I have removed a few details that are probably unnecessary for a summary.
 * Route description
 * Well written? -- There are issues with overly using mileposts to locate every intersection/feature on the road. I would suggest looking at the possibility of removing these milepost numbers unless it is essential for understanding what the route is doing. There are also several sentences that are too long and might be better split into two. Below is a suggestion for how to rewrite the route description using the Ocean County section:


 * Factually accurate? -- Good
 * Broad in coverage? -- Generally good. Some improvements can be made by removing minor county route intersections that do not add to understanding the overall path of the route and are unnecessary detail.
 * Neutral and stable? -- Good
 * Images? -- Good


 * History
 * Well written? -- Good
 * Factually accurate? -- Good but some people may consider the cited sources to be unreliable. I don't have any reason to believe the information is wrong but better sources need to be found if the article is going to A-class or FA.
 * Broad in coverage? -- 19th century turnpike alignments should be mentioned. Otherwise, very good.
 * Neutral and stable? -- Good
 * Images? -- None directly related to history. The realignments can be somewhat confusing so a map of the evolution of Route 35 would be very helpful. It's not required for GA but this is something that editors of this article should think about in the future.


 * Overall comments -- The article has similar issues as NJ 27. A partial rewrite of te route description to make it more compact and eliminate most of the unnecessary milepost numbers would improve readability. The route is also part of several early turnpikes and these should be mentioned in the article. I'm not familiar with the area but this looks like it passes through "touristy" areas and it would be good to try to mention (and link to) more tourist attractions as appropriate. I'm putting the article on hold to allow for changes to the article. --Polaron | Talk 14:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have gone back and made changes to the article. Dough4872 (talk) 16:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. After some minor copyedits, I'm passing the article. Congratulations. --Polaron | Talk 22:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)