Talk:K-204 (Kansas highway)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Tayi Arajakate in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:K-204 (Kansas highway)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tayi Arajakate (talk · contribs) 01:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Comments

edit
  • Just a suggestion but, I don't think its necessary to specify the Kansas State Highway Commission in the lead and just present its current name. The nuance can go into the body. The Kansas Department of Transportation should be wiki-linked.

Assessment

edit
  1. Comprehension: The comprehension is good.
  2.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The prose is clear and concise.   Pass
    (b) (MoS) The article is compliant with the manual of style.   Pass
  3. Verifiability: The article is verifiable.
  4.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) The article has a list of references and in line citations for all material in the body.   Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Sources used are reliable   Pass
    (c) (original research) No original research found.   Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) No copyright violation or plagiarism found.   Pass
  5. Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive.
  6.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The article covers all major aspects.   Pass
    (b) (focused) No unnecessary deviations are present.   Pass
  7. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
  8.   Pass
    Notes Result
    The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.   Pass
  9. Stability: The article is stable.
  10.   Pass
    Notes Result
    No ongoing edit warring or content disputes.   Pass
  11. Illustration: The illustration is sufficient.
  12.   Pass
    Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) N/A   Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Caption is suitable.   Pass