Talk:Saskatchewan Highway 2/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

There are too many questions to be answered in the quality of the article. It has good sources and good information, but it's jumpy, unbalanced, and poorly constructed style-wise. Lets give it a copy-edit and balance the sections out. Add a history of the route as well. There is too much work to be allowed a hold, therefore, this article has been failed as a GA. Thank you for your efforts and good luck in your endeavors to improve the article
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Prose Issues:
 * ✅Do we need to repeat "Saskatchewan" after every city? The highway focuses on that province, it is not necessary to be redundant.
 * ✅Paragraph 2 contains inconsistencies of how SK is abbreviated.
 * ✅Interestingly? Please rewrite this to avoid POV issues and improve prose
 * ✅ Km? Is this correct for announcing points on a road?
 * MOS Issues
 * ✅ Extra Reading should be renamed as Further Reading and placed after References
 * ✅ Remove the Mexican Highway 45 shield - Inline images are highly discouraged.
 * This article needs a thorough copy-edit
 * The Community List is too large and covers what the paragraphs and the infobox cover already, lets tone it down or remove it.
 * The infobox contains only the rural municipalities - kind of like counties - and major cities. So the community box contains the towns, villages, hamlets and cities.  I have not included the ghost towns.  It is the longest highway of Saskatchewan, so there are a lot of placenames on it.  In 1926, there were placenames approximately every 6 miles apart, many of those are gone now as places became more centralized with the advent of vehicles after the industrial revolution.  Will maybe see if there are any hamlets to remove.  SriMesh |  talk  05:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The infobox contains only the rural municipalities - kind of like counties - and major cities. So the community box contains the towns, villages, hamlets and cities.  I have not included the ghost towns.  It is the longest highway of Saskatchewan, so there are a lot of placenames on it.  In 1926, there were placenames approximately every 6 miles apart, many of those are gone now as places became more centralized with the advent of vehicles after the industrial revolution.  Will maybe see if there are any hamlets to remove.  SriMesh |  talk  05:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The subject seems to jump around a bit - it's mostly a description of the route, with some items that do not talk about the route itself, rather about cities, places, etc around the route.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Contains at least one Weasel word
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * ✅Although you requested permission, I still question the licensing of File:SaskatchewanHighway2Map.png. I doubt it can be released under GFDL....There is no problem with the permissions of this map and copyright, however as the article had a lot of images anyways, I removed it.SriMesh |  talk  05:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅Inline images (the Mexican Federal route shield) clutter up and wreck the article's writing.
 * There are too many images in this article. Maybe due to the size of the article?  Remove a few of these and use a Wikimedia Commons tag at the bottom of the article.
 * ✅The Infobox size is compromised by the multiple maps within it, lets move one of the maps out into article proper.
 * ✅Inline images (the Mexican Federal route shield) clutter up and wreck the article's writing.
 * There are too many images in this article. Maybe due to the size of the article?  Remove a few of these and use a Wikimedia Commons tag at the bottom of the article.
 * ✅The Infobox size is compromised by the multiple maps within it, lets move one of the maps out into article proper.


 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Too many problems to warrent being able to hold for corrections, therefore I must fail this article.