Talk:Washington State Route 96

Latest comment: 11 years ago by TCN7JM in topic GA Review
Good articleWashington State Route 96 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 25, 2013Good article nomineeListed

Untitled edit

I removed the following because it was uncited, and I couldn't find anything at WSDOT relating to it.


-- Kéiryn talk 06:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Washington State Route 96/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TCN7JM (talk · contribs) 05:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I have yet to review Maryland Route 10, but I'll get to this one immediately after that one. Probably tomorrow. –TCN7JM 05:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Lead

  • SR 96 in parentheses should probably be bolded. I don't know why I haven't noticed this in any of the other articles I've reviewed from you.

Route description

  • Not sure suburban needs to be linked. City center is also questionable, but I can see where context is needed there.
    •   Un-linked
  • You've got a least busiest again.
    •   Changed to "least busy"

History

  • Turning lanes and traffic camera definitely don't need to be linked. The first just redirects to lane and the second is obvious in context.
    •   Un-linked

Major intersections

  • Should there not be a comma between Vancouver and BC?
    •  According to WSDOT SrWeb, it's marked as Vancouver BC (sans the comma).

Okay, this one is going   on hold for you to fix stuff. Overall, it's a good article. –TCN7JM 18:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Responded to every problem, not sure how to solve the first until a full discussion over bolding in parenthesis. SounderBruce 05:51, 25 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
Not exactly sure how per dispute at WT:USRD is a valid reason not to bold the abbreviation, but I'll disregard that and pass the article since a lot of better articles don't have the bolding. –TCN7JM 05:56, 25 February 2013 (UTC)Reply