Talk:New York State Route 17J/GA1

GA Review
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:
 * Great job! ĈĠ ☺ Simple? 23:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a horrible review. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree. On a similar note, I'm not sure why this article even exists as a standalone; its alignment and history are identical to NY 394. –  T M F 23:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Great job! ĈĠ ☺ Simple? 23:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a horrible review. --Rschen7754 (T C) 23:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree. On a similar note, I'm not sure why this article even exists as a standalone; its alignment and history are identical to NY 394. –  T M F 23:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree. On a similar note, I'm not sure why this article even exists as a standalone; its alignment and history are identical to NY 394. –  T M F 23:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)