Comments:

• The references in the route description need a good tune-up. From the way it appears to me, the last three sentences of the first paragraph are unreferenced. There's also two consecutive sentences attributed to the same source (reference 2); if they are from the same source, just place a single reference following the second sentence. The same issue is present in the second paragraph: two consecutive sentences are attributed to reference 1.
• The mileage and establishment date in the infobox are unreferenced. Also, the length in miles goes to one decimal but its metric conversion does not.
• In the infobox, the termini routes are to be abbreviated per the last revision of INNA; I have no idea why this part of INNA was removed when it was merged to the standards page.
• The counties in the infobox should be wikilinked.
• "The Chickasaw cost nearly US$44 million to build" - how much is that in 2007 dollars? Also, per WP:$: "The exception to [fully identifing a currency on its first appearance] is in articles related entirely to the US and the UK, in which the first occurrence may also be shortened and not linked ($34 and £22, respectively), unless this would be unclear." My interpretation of this is that the "US$" is unnecessary, but it's not a big deal if it remains.
• Tolls section: delink 2008 per MOS:SYL.
• Exit list: why is "Westbound exit and eastbound entrance" and its vice versa counterpart two rows down bolded? Also, the inconsistent precision of the mileposts is slightly jarring, but I've seen the length reference and I'm aware that's all the precision that's given for the two intermediary exits. Consider that last point a "comment" more than a "problem", as I won't oppose over it in this instance since there's not much that can be done.
• Reference 12 (web link) needs an access date. -- TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 11:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC) reply

• Fixed all. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 17:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC) reply

Just a few comments for now:

• In the exit list, the first and last entry have Westbound terminus and Eastbound terminus in the notes section. Is that saying those are the termini of SH 7 or SH 1 or is that talking about the Turnpike itself? If it is talking about the turnpike, then it contradicts the infobox which says it has a southern and northern terminus.
• The map doesn't really clue me in on where this highway is, can we have a map that is zoomed out a bit?
• You state in the first sentence that it is located in Oklahoma so you don't need to mention it following the cities in the second sentence.
• "Partial interchange" is a redlink, looking at a map, it looks like half of a diamond interchange, so perhaps change " partial interchange" to "partial diamond interchange"?

That's it for now. -- Holderca1 ^talk 21:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC) reply

• Fixed all except the map, which I'll have sometime this week, as soon as I can get around to beating QGIS into submission. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 17:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC) reply
• QGIS decided it wants to output blank images now, so I'm afraid I cannot fix this issue. Sorry. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 17:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC) reply
• User:25or6to4 provided a map, so all your concerns have been addressed. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 20:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Okay, here are a few more comments:

• You have one source for the distance in the infobox and a different one for the distance in the lead, any particular reason why?
• After the first use of "Oklahoma Turnpike Authority" and "Oklahoma Department of Transportation," put their acronyms in parantheses.

That's it. -- Holderca1 ^talk 15:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC) reply

• Fixed all. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 20:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Two things:

• While I realize it may be a tad repetitive, I'd like to see the major junctions in the infobox say "US 177 north of Sulphur" or something like that. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other route that has junctions listed in the infobox without cities.
• Same issue every A-Class review has (:-P)... the prose says "U.S. 177", while the templates in the junction list say "US-177". Choose one convention and run with it.

For some strange reason, as minor as it is, that first bullet point really irks me, but just know that I'm really close to supporting it as is. Well-referenced, well-written. Good job. :-) -- Kéiryn ^talk 10:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC) reply

• Fixed all. — Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 20:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC) reply