Talk:New York State Route 47

Change of Intersection Template
This article was changed to bring its intersection template to the NYint format. No other changes were made. It is important to verify, update and/or correct as necessary.Fwgoebel 04:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Length notes
From :
 * NY 104 to NY 383 (now NY/I-390): 6.34 mi
 * I-390 to Rochester city line (NY 383): 0.12 mi

Calculated using Microsoft Streets and Trips:
 * Rochester city line to Elmwood (NY 383): 0.35 mi
 * NY 383 to I-590 (Elmwood): 4.42 mi

From :
 * Elmwood to Culver (NY/I-590): 8.06 mi

19.29 miles -- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 23:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Total

History notes
--Polaron | Talk 14:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Rochester alignment not numbered in 1932 ALA Green Book map (NY 47 still on Lake George-Hague alignment)
 * 1938 map shows Route 47 in Rochester area as described in History section except that the map shows it ending at NY 31 (Lyell Ave). Route must have been designated between 1932 and 1938. When was it extended north to Greece?

GA Review

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written:
 * Pass It's adequately organized, can format in many computer resolutions.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable:
 * Weak pass Has plenty of references that point to reliable sources. The only main problem is that the intro paragraph doesn't have any at the time. Also, that last sentence in the intro section is strongly recommended to be moved or merged where appropriate. In short, that sentence "In 1980, the NY 47 designation was removed and replaced with several others, including NY 590 and NY 390." doesn't belong there on its own. But those flaws are only minor, because that can easily be fixed! :)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage:
 * Pass Lots of stuff covered in the article throughout. Looks good, overall.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy:
 * Pass Lookin' good!
 * 1) It is stable:
 * Pass No edit wars there either.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
 * Pass Plenty of pictures placed in appropriate spots in the article throughout. Could use more if possible, though.


 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass To sum up, this article meets the criteria for a good article, but if it were to be promoted even further, this article would most likely need a fix on the introductory paragraph. But overall, it's a pass. Good job! We are now all happy. :) Dabbydabby (talk) 01:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)