Talk:Ontario Highway 136/GA1

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 05:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Nominator:  Floydian  τ ¢

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  05:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written
 * a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:.
 * b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

✅


 * 1) Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  ✅
 * 2) Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  ✅
 * 3) * The material is not contentious and does not require inline citations.
 * 4) Check for Introductory text:  ✅
 * 5) * Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO): ✅
 * 6) ** Major Point 1: Route description (summarised well in the lead "The majority ... enters Orangeville.")
 * 7) ** Major Point 2: History (summarised well in the lead "Highway 136, was a ... Orangeville.")
 * 8) * Check for Relative emphasis: ✅
 * 9) ** Major Point 1: Route description (mismatch in due weight between the lead and the body) Fixed.
 * 10) ** Major Point 2: History (mismatch in due weight between the lead and the body) Fixed.
 * 11) * Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN): ✅
 * 12) ** Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE): ✅
 * 13) *** The first sentence is "Highway 136, was a ..., located near ... ." It's not clear exactly which points it connected. Refer this FA on Ontario Highway 401, "King's Highway 401 ... is a 400-series highway in the Canadian province of Ontario stretching 817.9 kilometres (508.2 mi) from Windsor to the Quebec border." Also refer the FA on Ontario Highway 416, "King's Highway 416 ... is a 400-series highway in the Canadian province of Ontario that connects the Trans-Canada Highway (Highway 417) in Ottawa with Highway 401 between Brockville and Cornwall." So the first sentence can be made more precise and clear. Fixed.
 * 14) ** Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE): ✅
 * 15) ** Check for Proper names and titles: ✅
 * 16) ** Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
 * 17) ** Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
 * 18) ** Check for Pronunciation: None
 * 19) ** Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK): ✅
 * 20) Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  ✅
 * 21) * Check for Non-English titles:
 * 22) * Check for Usage in first sentence:
 * 23) * Check for Separate section usage:
 * 24) Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  ✅
 * 25) Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER):  None

✅


 * 1) Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  ✅
 * 2) * Check for Headings and sections: ✅
 * 3) * Check for Section templates and summary style: ✅
 * 4) * Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS): ✅
 * 5) Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  ✅
 * 6) * Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER): ✅
 * 7) * Check for Works or publications: None
 * 8) * Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): None
 * 9) * Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR): ✅
 * 10) * Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): None
 * 11) * Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): None
 * 12) * Check for Links to sister projects: None
 * 13) * Check for Navigation templates: ✅
 * 14) Check for Formatting:  ✅
 * 15) * Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):
 * 16) * Check for Links:
 * 17) * Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):

Check for WP:WTW:''' None

Check for WP:EMBED:''' ✅
 * The table is standard for such articles. Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416

2: Verifiable with no original research
 * a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
 * b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: very good Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416

✅


 * 1) Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING):  (not contentious)
 * 2) * Is it contentious?: No
 * 3) * Does the ref indeed support the material?:
 * 4) Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):
 * 5) * Who is the author?:
 * 6) ** Ministry of Transportation of Ontario
 * 7) ** Google Maps
 * 8) ** Peter Heiler
 * 9) ** Ontario Department of Highways
 * 10) * Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
 * 11) * What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
 * 12) ** very good Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
 * 13) ** Random check on accessible sources - Source 1 (ISSN 0825-5350) & Source 3 (ISBN 978-1-55198-226-7)
 * 14) * What else has the author published?:
 * 15) * Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
 * 16) Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):
 * 17) * Reliable. Used in other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416
 * 18) * Random check on accessible sources - Source 1 (ISSN 0825-5350) & Source 3 (ISBN 978-1-55198-226-7)
 * 19) Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

✅

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: ✅


 * 1) Check for Direct quotations:
 * 2) Check for Likely to be challenged:
 * 3) Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):


 * c. No original research: ✅

✅


 * 1) Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  ✅
 * 2) Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  ✅
 * 3) Check for original images (WP:OI):  ✅

3: Broad in its coverage

✅

Not all sources are accessible. Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416. Random check on accessible sources - Source 1 (ISSN 0825-5350) & Source 3 (ISBN 978-1-55198-226-7)


 * 1) Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
 * 2) Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
 * 3) Check for Out of scope:
 * 4) Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
 * 5) Check for All material that is notable is covered:
 * 6) Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
 * 7) * Random check on accessible sources - Source 1 (ISSN 0825-5350) & Source 3 (ISBN 978-1-55198-226-7)
 * 8) Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
 * 9) Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
 * 10) Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

✅


 * 1) Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
 * 2) Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

✅

4. Fair representation without bias: ✅


 * 1) Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 2) Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  ✅
 * 3) Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  ✅
 * 4) Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  ✅
 * 5) * Addressed in the lead criteria.
 * 6) Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  ✅
 * 7) Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  ✅
 * 8) Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 9) Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  ✅
 * 10) Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  ✅
 * 11) Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  ✅
 * 12) Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  ✅
 * 13) Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI):  None
 * 14) Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV):  None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images ''' ✅ (Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416.)

✅

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:


 * 1) Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):
 * 2) Check for copyright status:
 * 3) Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):
 * 4) Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:


 * 1) Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):
 * 2) Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):
 * 3) Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):

As per the above checklist, the issues identified are : Fixed
 * The need for Relative emphasis in the lead.
 * The First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE) of the lead can be more precise and clear.

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm delighted to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  16:44, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review. I've fixed the first sentence and beefed up the lede with a few additional points, but I can't do much more without getting into finer details best left out of the lede. The general flow of that first sentence is consistent with all Ontario highway articles so occasionally it's hard to work in those details. Cheers,  Floydian  τ ¢  00:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. -- Seabuckthorn   ♥  01:03, 8 January 2014 (UTC)