Talk:Texas Recreational Road 11/GA2

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

Reviewer: Scott5114 (talk · contribs) 22:50, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Some preliminary comments, before I start on the GA checklist...
 * The article needs a WP:USRD/MTF-standard map in the infobox. If such a map hasn't been requested, put in a request—it should be simple to fulfill since there is already a KML file.
 * I have requested a map, but I can't guarantee that one will be made any time soon.


 * The map that is in the article is useless. It just shows two perpendicular lines with no context to show where or what it's depicting, or even that it's a map. It should be removed.
 * I have removed it.


 * The AADT information is irrelevant since it's data for FM 1929, not RR 11. Much of this wouldn't be germane to the article anyway; explaining who TxDOT is and why they measure AADT is beyond the scope of the article. Most of this paragraph should be removed.
 * Cut everything but the NHS stuff.


 * a boat-launch ramp of the coast of the lake - on the coast of the lake?
 * Fixed. - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 04:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * More later. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 22:55, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Might want to consider splitting the lead into two paragraphs (one for the r/d and one for the history). The history needs to split into two or more paragraphs. This can be kind of tricky with history sections, but a good idea is to put a paragraph break where a large period of time passes between changes.
 * I split the history after the designation of FM 2134, which I believe is reasonable.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * See comments about the AADT info above.
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * See comments about the map above.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold until the above issues are addressed. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 01:06, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have attempted to address all of your concerns. Thanks for the review, it was looking like I would have a second Cooper, Texas–length waiting period. - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 04:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Passed. Congrats on your GA (again). —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 19:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * On hold until the above issues are addressed. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 01:06, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have attempted to address all of your concerns. Thanks for the review, it was looking like I would have a second Cooper, Texas–length waiting period. - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 04:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Passed. Congrats on your GA (again). —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 19:35, 28 May 2013 (UTC)