Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Bayshore Freeway/1

Bayshore Freeway edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: No action. No cogent case for delisting the article per the GA criteria has been made. A new reassessment can be started should such a case be found in the future. For now, it stays a GA. Geometry guy 19:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I-15 (talk · contribs) has been "cleaning" up the article by making minor edits to mostly tables and adding clean-up templates. Rschen7754 (talk · contribs) and NE2 (talk · contribs) have been reverting I-15, and I-15 reverts them back. This has led out to edit wars over the past couple of days. Furthermore, there is a dispute if Bayshore Freeway includes US 101 and I-80, or whether just US 101 is Bayshore Freeway and I-80 should go into James Lick Freeway. The Bayshore Freeway article is becoming unstable. I would normally re-classify this as B-quality, and I would even support a merge of this article to U.S. Route 101 in California. However, I need an outside review, so therefore I am asking for a good article reassessment to see if this article still qualifies for GA status. -- M*gill*FR (blab to me) 23:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: I would consider the edit-warring and clumsy prose-style in parts as enough for delisting. I found and marked one broken link. Also the dates in the references need to be de-wikified Jezhotwells (talk) 20:01, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delist: Fails #5. Problems remain unresolved by involved parties. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 00:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There have been no edits to the article for a week. In what sense is it unstable? Geometry guy 21:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]