Talk:New York State Route 205/GA1

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

Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 01:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

This article came up for review at WP:GAN. It appears to be quite well written, so now I will break this down and analyze it by the GA criteria. Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 01:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * As I've read the prose, everything reads quite smoothly to me. The article is compliant with manual of style guidelines, and in my opinion meets the criteria for being reasonably well written.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * All sources are active and reliable. Article is sourced adequately, and references are formatted correctly.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * For as much as is relevant to the article, the article is broad in its coverage and focused on its topic. The history section really helps this article to meet 3a.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Looks to be quite neutral. Nothing stands out to me as having a point of view.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * No edits in two months. I would say that says it's stable.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * All images used are free, and used appropriately.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Well done! I would say we meet the GA criteria at this time.