Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment/A-Class review/M-35 (Michigan highway)


 * The following is an archived roads debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page, on WT:USRD, or another applicable discussion page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the debate was promote to A-class. --  K é iryn talk 21:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

M-35 (Michigan highway) (5 net support votes)
review
 * Suggestion: Promotion to A-Class
 * Nominator's comments: The first GA produced by MSHP. Other editors have suggested during informal peer reviews that it should be brought to ACR after passing GA
 * Nominated by: Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Support votes:


 * Oppose votes:

Neutral - All of my above comments have been addressed, remaining neutral pending the resolution of comments from other reviewers. --Holderca1talk 16:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Not sure how I missed this earlier, but refs 15 & 17 both violate Verifiability as they are self-published sources. I would recommend finding another source that reports this information and removing these sources. --Holderca1talk 19:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I just noticed this was brought up below and you mentioned that it may qualify as an exemption to the rule. I have started a discussion here: Reliable sources/Noticeboard to determine its reliability.  --Holderca1talk 20:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I got a copy of the Fred Rydholm book from the local library finally. I was able to expand and re-cite the Ford history over to it. I'm left with needing new sources for the 1926 extension of M-35 down US 2/US 41 and over old M-91 in 1926 and the reconnection between the northern and southern segments from 1953 until 1968. Any suggestions? I recently joined the Road Map Collectors Association hoping to find someone with copies of the relevant state maps. If so, then these bits of info can be re-cited as well. Imzadi1979 (talk) 16:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Support - Good work, took care of the RS issue. Looks good now, looking forward to seeing it at FAC. --Holderca1talk 20:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Support all my concerns have been resolvedDavemeistermoab (talk) 03:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Neutral awaiting the results of the RS discussion.

--Rschen7754 (T C) 22:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Source issues per Holderca1.

Support. Everything's been done that I can think of. Just as a note, I may have been mistaken earlier. It's possibly supposed to be a colon before that second blockquote instead of a comma – or it could be that both are acceptable. I can't find anything in the MOS one way or the other. --  K é iryn talk 13:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment - I'll be out of town and only online sporadically this weekend. It might be that I won't be able to follow up on any comments until Sunday 2008-04-27 even though I'll see them before then. Imzadi1979 (talk) 00:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support All of my above comments have been addressed, and I don't see anything that should prevent this from reaching A-class. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  01:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
 * Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -  between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 9km, use 9 km, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 9&amp;nbsp;km.[?]


 * I find this one a little curious. Of all the measurements given, I thought all of them used the convert template which does that automatically. I'm puzzled. Any ideas where there's a faulty measurement that would trip up the script?
 * I went through it and couldn't find anything either, not sure what it is picking up. --Holderca1talk 02:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I found what it was catching, the units in reference 3. --Holderca1talk 02:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Good catch, and fixed. Imzadi1979 (talk) 21:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Per Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called  ==The Biography== , it should be changed to  ==Biography== .[?]


 * Good idea, but it's not just a steel bridge, it's The Steel Bridge in the local vernacular. Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, ignore this. --Holderca1talk 02:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Per Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading  ==Magellan's journey== , use  ==Journey== .[?]


 * Suggestions on rewriting the headings? Personally I think they are fine and would sound funny as "In the Huron Mountains" (ok, not that bad) or "Henry Ford and the highway" Imzadi1979 (talk) 23:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You could just simply put "Henry Ford". I think what this is getting at is that it is a given that everything in the article is about M-35, so a section heading titled "Henry Ford" would imply a section about him in relation to M-35.  --Holderca1talk 02:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Holderca1talk 23:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
 * Fixed headings and that one reference without the non-breaking spaces. Imzadi1979 (talk) 16:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The above is an archived roads debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page, on WT:USRD, or another applicable discussion page. No further edits should be made to this section.