Talk:St. Joseph Valley Parkway/GA1

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

Reviewer: Admrboltz (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 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):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Just a couple of minor items to look at:
 * Two references from the The Herald-Palladium should be tagged registration required if just a free registration and subscription required if paid.
 * Portal links are missing.
 * A map would be nice.
 * Since the route is mostly in IN, I would suggest using the normal RJL templates, and not the MI specific ones.

I am passing this article. --Admrboltz (talk) 20:17, 26 November 2010 (UTC)