Jump to content

Talk:M-91 (Michigan highway)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Viridiscalculus (talk) 16:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  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):
  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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
  • The Route Description has a run-on sentence: "North of Langston are Tacoma, West and Spring lakes, and further north, M-91 curves to the northwest around Farnsworth Lake, resuming its due-north course a mile (1.6 km) to the west."
  • The History has a run-on sentence: "In 1927, all of the current M-91 was originally part of M-66, and by 1930, M-91 was designated from Rogers City towards Cheboygan County along the Lake Huron shore."
  • Use of the term "turned back" in the History is confusing.
  • In the Route description, if M-91 has names outside of Greenville, it would be a good idea to include them. Before the highway was numbered, it was probably referred to by its name.
  • The History is not focused enough. There seems to be a lot of missing information. I understand if you are missing maps for dates, but there are several routing issues that are not answered but should be able to be discovered and mentioned. In particular:
    1. M-91 now meets M-44 west of Belding. Before M-91 was truncated, what was M-91's routing from Belding north to where it rejoined present M-91?
    2. What roads did M-91 follow between US 16 and Belding? I would explain exactly which road US 16 followed south of Lowell.
  • In Major intersections, the southern terminus location is Otisco Township. All other sections mention Belding or "near Belding." For consistency, I would include Otisco Township in the Lead and Route description, constructed as or similar to "M-91 begins at M-44 in Otisco Township west of Belding."
  • The Lead seems to have a lot of general information, explaining that the highway was truncated, was discontinuous, transferred to county control, and only meets one state highway between termini. While those are technically correct, those conditions could apply to any highway. The language could be more concise. I would prefer to see more specific information about M-91 to make me want to read the History.
  • Recommendation: On Hold This article needs a little more work before it can become a Good Article, but I have no doubt you will get it done. Let me know if you have any questions or objections. — Viridiscalculus (talk) 18:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Replies
  • RD tweaked.
  • History tweaked.
  • The term is used twice, the first time as "turned back to local control" and the second time as just "turned back".
  • Tweaked as part of the above.
  • The history is comprehensive, once the minor extension southward was added in. (M-91 was extended to continue to intersect US 16 when the latter was shifted to the freeway that is now I-96.) I even added the "last section to be paved", which is something minor enough to leave out.
  • Many other articles leave use generalized locations in the RD and lead but use the specific township in the JL. In Michigan, all land is part of either a township or city. (Villages are technically in a township.) I added the township's name to the RD, but I won't add it to the Lead. The reason is that you can't find Otisco Township on the state map or most atlases, and the lead should be a generalized summary of information in the article. That level of specificity is not needed in the lead.
  • Once again, the lead should be a generalized summary of information in the article. To add any more detail to the lead would duplicate the body of the article, defeating the purpose of the lead.

That should do it in regards to the GA criteria. Imzadi 1979 → 01:12, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • Alright, this article has been improved to my satisfaction. Promoted. — Viridiscalculus (talk) 03:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:M-91_(Michigan_highway)/GA1&oldid=1085460870"