Talk:Regina Bypass/GA1

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

Comments:
 * 1) ✅ The infobox is messy. For instance, by putting Pinkie Road in the rotue parameter, you get a shield that you can see part of the name of the road and "Highway Pinkie Road" for a name
 * 2) ✅ Specific names, such as Dewdney Avenue West, should not be in infobox --  Dewdney Ave West- the title - is much more notable than Saskatchewan Highway 730.  These are both the same naming outside of Regina in the Rm of Sherwood No 159.  Dewdney Ave West is a huge road of the capital city of Regina.  Highway 730 is a secondary highway of Saskatchewan
 * 3) ✅ I do not understand how there can be a browse when this is not a numbered route.
 * 4) ✅ The lead of this article is too short, it needs more detail about the descriptive and historical aspects of the route
 * 5) ✅ "Saskatchewan Highway 1 the Trans Canada Highway and 11 will..." needs comma. Also "11" needs to be clarified
 * 6) ✅The article is lacking a history section about the planning of the route
 * 7) The pictures in the article do not directly pertain to Pinkie Road itself --  There are no actual pictures of Pinkie Road available, these are the closest, the aerial shows where it will be constructed and the existing rural Pinkie Road not a 4 lane highway.
 * 8) ✅ Commas are missing again in sentences within Travel route section
 * 9) ✅ The intersection list needs cleanup. Information about construction is not appropriate for the notes section.
 * 10) ✅ I do not think "Pinkie Road, Saskatchewan" is an appropriate title for the article. If this is the only notable Pinkie Road, you do not to indicate Saskatchewan in the title. Otherwise, Saskatchewan should be in parentheses

Due to these issues in the article, I do not feel it currently meets the GA criteria. Therefore, I will have to fail it for now. You can make improvements to this article based on these comments and renominate it. Dough4872 (talk) 04:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to review this article. Many of the items have been initially addressed, will tend to the others shortly as well.  Kind Regards SriMesh |  talk  17:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)