Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Dough4872 ( talk · contribs) 04:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC) reply

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS):

   • " Later, SR 364 meets SR 219, and moves northeast, creating the eastern side of the Grand Lake.", does the road actually create the side of the lake? I would use different wording here.
   • The sentence "The route meets at an T-intersection with SR 703, starting a concurrency." sounds awkward.
   • The history has several awkward sentences. Also it says SR 364 is a divided highway, which does not sound right as it appears this is a two-lane country road

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   • You could provide a little more historical details in the lead besides year. Maybe mention highways or towns where the termini were at.
   • I'm pretty sure the history can be extended.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   An image of the road would be nice, but not required.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

The article has several major issues that need a lot of time to work on. Therefore, I will have to fail the article for now. It may be renominated once it is improved. Dough 48 72 04:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC) reply