Talk:K-4 (Kansas highway)/GA1

Latest comment: 4 years ago by SounderBruce in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 01:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)Reply


Will review in a bit. The article, however, looks to be in poor condition. The highway is quite long but the history section is short and the route description is quite underwhelming (and does not have adequate citations). You will need to add more non-map sources as well. SounderBruce 01:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Comments edit

@SounderBruce: I fixed a lot of the problems you mentioned. Let me know what else, Thanks, 420Traveler (talk) 03:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

From my first read through:

Infobox and lead
  • Length needs to be cited in the infobox
  • Junction list in infobox has too many entries (per WP:USRD/STDS)
  • Comma missing after "state highway in Kansas"
  • The second sentence should mention the overall span of the highway, in terms of what regions it connects, rather than jumping straight to a terminus.
  • "traverses eastward" is not grammatically correct
  • Missing comma before "including"
  • "Then by", drop the "then"
  • "the former K-52" is missing a descriptor (route, alignment of)
  • The lead is way too short compared to the rest of the article
Route description
  • Caption on first image has a typo (K-14)
  • Don't use "parallels" as a verb
  • "Interstate" should not be capitalized by itself; I suggest using "freeway" instead
  • Exit numbers aren't important and could be omitted for better flow
  • "K-4" is overused and should be replaced with a variety of aliases
  • The route description neglects to mention terrain, features, nearby places, or any number of useful things. It reads like a readout from a turn-by-turn navigation system.

And that's where I stopped closely reading. This article has huge issues with WP:PROSELINE text in the History section, is missing mileposts in the junction list, and has a whole host of WP:MOS violations (such as WP:DATECOMMA). It clearly does not meet GA standards and would not without a major amount of work. SounderBruce 07:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC)Reply