Talk:Utah State Route 101/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Some minor MOS breaches with missing non-breaking spaces between numbers and units in measurements that were just fixed.
 * 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):
 * A photo would be nice, but not required. The same goes for a map.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * The paragraph in the History section on the car accident isn't really needed, IMHO. You might want to remove since it isn't very notable. Imzadi1979 (talk) 22:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * A photo would be nice, but not required. The same goes for a map.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * The paragraph in the History section on the car accident isn't really needed, IMHO. You might want to remove since it isn't very notable. Imzadi1979 (talk) 22:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)