Talk:Ontario Highway 58/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 22:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Lede
 * "The southern segment travels from Niagara Regional Road 3, formerly Highway 3, in Port Colborne, to the Highway 58A junction in the southern end of Welland, a distance of 7.2 km (4.5 mi); the northern segment begins at Highway 20 near Allanburg and travels north and west to a large junction with Highway 406 at the St. Catharines – Thorold boundary, a distance of 8.3 km (5.2 mi). " -too long. New sentence before the northern segment is fine.
 * Fixed -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Isn't "travelled" a British English spelling?
 * Not sure if Canadian English uses two or one, but I've always used two l's in my writing and never had it contested before. -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Description
 * "the route passes beneath a railway" -can you be more specific on the railway?
 * Done. -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Downloading
 * "Budget constraints brought on by a recession in the 1990s resulted in the Mike Harris provincial government forming the Who Does What? committee to" -when was this?
 * Specified the year. -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Table
 * Do you intend clearing those red links in the table?
 * Done. -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

♦ Dr. Blofeld  22:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * My apologies, I don't believe I received a notice that the GAN had begun. I've made fixes as noted above. -  Floydian  τ ¢  19:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Making sure you've seen this. --Rschen7754 18:09, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, the ping didn't work! I did check in on this for a few weeks but left it when it seemed the writer wasn't coming back! Thanks for addressing!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: ♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)