Wikipedia:Peer review/Transportation in South Florida/archive2

Transportation in South Florida
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm looking for a wider variety of suggestions than I've gotten with the various (failed) GA and FA nominations. I've done massive reference overhauling and removed some of the more rote content that was copied from other articles (i.e. Miami and section main articles). There's still more to do and every time I actually read some of my work in retrospect (which is always hard to do) it's never as clever as I thought when I was writing it. Peer Review one year ago stagnated with no input. When adding extra parameters to references to try to achieve the (apparent) minimum of five, the issues of link rot and removal came up. I am wondering if literally every online-only source would need to be archived. I have also noticed more lately relevant quotes from reference links being added inside the reference html. I could see where this would be useful and nifty in many instances in the article, but how much is too much? The article is far more overarching than any other "Transport in..." article I have ever seen, and this surprised me as I searched for guidance; I came to the realization maybe this could in fact be a template for others. From a macro perspective, how is the article? Is it quirky and awkward, or does it have the potential to be as good as I think it might be with little beyond technical tweaks? Does it stand a cold object's chance in a hot place of being featured? To this I might add, if a featured recognition would require a major overhaul including genericizing and removal of large amounts of content that could be perceived as outlying or risque to fit the pre-defined form factor, I would rather not pursue it.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, B137 (talk) 06:40, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I am working on these automatic suggestions but am a little busy, also a nibbet of qualitative info I seek as much as a table of technical points that are bot-worthy or just need one simple but long and tedious edit to fix. B137 (talk) 03:07, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the structure and grammar of the intro. This is quite a long article.  Look at mine?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Jonathan_Mitchell/archive1 Ylevental (talk) 21:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)