Talk:K-116 (Kansas highway)

K-116 (Kansas highway) 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. Review: January 29, 2022. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

U.S. Roads: State highways / Kansas Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Topics  U.S. state highways   Locations  Kansas   This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it. This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists. This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.   Kansas Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Kansas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KansasWikipedia:WikiProject KansasTemplate:WikiProject KansasKansas articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is

transcluded from Talk:K-116 (Kansas highway)/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 08:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments to start:

• Too many exact distances; tone them down for readability.

Should be fixed now. -420Traveler (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The caption mentions US-59 but the image shows US-159.

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The highway not being included in the National Highway System is not worth mentioning.

I think it should becuase it may be confusing to some readers since it will still say "connects to it"? But let me know If you strongly disagree and I can remove it

Still inappropriate and out of scope.

• The flooding seems like very routine coverage and doesn't seem to have a real purpose in this article.

Ok I wasnt sure, I'll remove it. -420Traveler (talk) 14:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Watch for commas after dates, such as "May 11, 1993".

More in a few days. SounderBruce 08:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done with my first full run-through. This article is quite far from meeting GA standards and I would suggest copyediting and learning from existing road GAs/FAs before nominating other articles of this nature. SounderBruce 07:20, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

• Add a region to the opening sentence to make it clear where in the state the highway is.

Should be fixed now? -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "co-designated as" should be "co-designated with" or use a simpler term

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "farmlands" should not be plural; the sentence is quite boring and does not tell the reader much, if anything.

 Fixed But it tells the reader that the majority of the highway is rural (a summary) -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "for" is missing before "its entire length"

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "there were auto trails" is awkwardly placed and should be expanded upon.

Should be fixed now? -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• General dates/decades are needed for these auto trails
  • The auto trails that were not direct predecessors to K-116 should not be mentioned in the lead

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Assigned by who?

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "A year later" would suffice in place of January 1938

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Move the K-116 extension sentence to before the new alignment sentence to provide sufficient context

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Route description

• "Begins" is used twice in the first sentence

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Exact distances are unnecessary and make it hard to read.

Should be fixed now? -420Traveler (talk) 14:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still a few remaining that aren't needed (1 mile in Holton, 4 miles through farmland); the concurrency length is fine. SounderBruce 07:20, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 03:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Image caption should give a better location for context

Should be fixed now?? -420Traveler (talk) 03:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "Travelling" versus "traveled" later on: Choose whether to use single or double Ls for consistency

My bad, missed that one. Changed to one "l" since we are in the United States of America -420Traveler (talk) 18:23, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• K-16 concurrency should be moved before "along 4th Street"

 Fixed

• Minor creeks that aren't notable in their own right should not be mentioned, and certainly not linked.

 Fixed

• Descriptions such as "farmland", "scattered houses", "small rolling hills", "grass lands" not supported by map interpretation, please don't overuse them. (I only listed a few from the first paragraph, but this is an issue with the whole section)

 Fixed

• Besides the OR issue, "rolling hills covered with grasslands" is not grammatically correct.

 Fixed

• The section overuses K-116 and doesn't space out its use of "The highway" appropriately; it's tiresome to read so many repeated terms.

 Fixed

• Minor roads that don't lead to linked towns (e.g. Anderson Road) should not be mentioned. Brevity is better.

 Fixed

• "crosses over the Delaware River then passes" is missing a transition

 Fixed

• "shifts back north then continues east" is also missing a transition

 Fixed

• "an area with more scattered areas of trees" is repetitive and borderline OR

 Fixed

• "K-116 continues east and soon crosses over Little Stranger Creek, then reaches a junction with US-159, which it begins to overlap." needs to be shortened by using fewer fillers.

 Fixed

• Where does US-159 continue from its two intersections with K-116?

 Fixed

• "traffic levels" should be "traffic volumes"

 Fixed

• "on average" is a bit of an easter egg link; please use the full term instead of hiding it.

 Fixed

• "varied" is misused here

What would you suggest?? -420Traveler (talk) 18:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Second highest AADT is not needed; it only serves to pad out the paragraph, which should be avoided.

 Fixed

• Again, the NHS does not need to be mentioned if the highway is not part of it.

 Fixed

History

• Again, the flooding is trivial unless there were long-term effects (e.g. a rerouting)

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 13:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Section is too short to warrant subheadings. The second paragraph, however, needs to be split.

 Fixed

• The first sentence is not supported by citation 11.

Should be  Fixed now? -420Traveler (talk) 03:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• "resolution on" should be "resolution passed on" or "resolution approved on"

 Fixed

• "what is now a food manufacturer" - Is this really necessary to include?

I said food manufacturer to let readers know it is no longer even a road there amymore. I changed to "building" will this work? -420Traveler (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comma needed in "K-16 where it turned south"

 Fixed

• So both resolutions were passed on the same day? This needs to be cleared up.

 Fixed

• "it was approved" is used several times and not clear what "it" is referring to.

Should be fixed now? -420Traveler (talk) 03:05, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Inflation figure needed for the $54,589 bid, but is the company name really necessary?

 Fixed

• "Six dangerous curves" according to who? Explain why they were dangerous, and any statistics available.

It says in the resolution that they were dangerous if you look closely. So  Fixed

• "opened up to traffic" needs to drop the "up"

 Fixed

• "Also" can be moved after "US-159"

 Fixed

• "solely US-59" is missing a transition.

 Fixed

Major intersections

• Guide signs do not mention the hospital name, so it should be dropped from the notes per
  MOS:RJL
  .

 Fixed

References

• Citation 1 needs a better title

This one doesn't have a title, and I'm not sure how to properly add a title when there isn't one? -420Traveler (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Citation 2 is a dead link

Should be fixed, let me know if not because we have been having trouble with . -420Traveler (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Citation 11 needs to link to the
  David Rumsey Map Collection
  article

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still leads to a 404 page.

Worked for me?? -420Traveler (talk) 03:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove the locations from newspaper citations to keep things consistent

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Add links to the newspapers themselves on first use; same goes for
  Newspapers.com

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments

@SounderBruce: All problems were fixed and responded to, let me know if I have missed anything. -420Traveler (talk) 03:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's still a few more items:

• Citation 2 still leads to a 404 page.

 Fixed

• "The two highways" is mentioned immediately after "the highway" is used for the concurrency; to reduce confusion, just don't pluralize it.

 Fixed

• "as it crosses into Atchison County" could be simplified to just "in Atchison County"; readers can infer that there is a county line being crossed here.

 Fixed

• There's still descriptions of "flat farmland" that need to be simplified to comply with OR guidelines.

Should be  Fixed

• "Varied" still needs to be replaced; I think "ranged" would be a better term to use here, as we're discussing a simple range of figures.

 Fixed

• The NHS mention is still pointless filler.

Dont seem why it hurts or what its a violation of so I kept it. -420Traveler (talk) 16:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Citation 13 uses the wrong location.

 Fixed

• Instead of food manufacturer, it could be simply turned into "a commercial building", which is obvious from the satellite map.

I already changed to "building" but did add in "commercial" -420Traveler (talk) 16:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Repeating "January 7, 1937" is not ideal, use "the same day"; also move the K-16 overlap explanation to after its resolution is mentioned.

 Fixed

• "according to the SHC" is not the correct attribution to use here; use "identified by the SHC". I still would rather see more context here, as "dangerous" is a vague term.

Not sure how else to fix this, I'll remove the word "dangerous" if you'd like? -420Traveler (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still have to clean up these items before passing this. SounderBruce 02:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SounderBruce: I fixed almost everything, just have a question about the dangerous curves. Thanks -420Traveler (talk) 16:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still more issues:

• The new Citation 2 has unclear page numbers (which don't seem to match the in-document pages) and isn't verifiable at the moment.

Changed it to the way New York State Route 28 is set up, should be good now.

• Citations should all include locations or omit them for consistency.

I added back the ones you previously had told me to remove, so they all have a location.

• There's still a "flat farmalnd" at the start of the RD's second paragraph.

 Fixed

• The opening sentence of the RD's third paragraph (setting up the AADT) is a mouthful and should be split.

Should be  Fixed now.

• The NHS mention is still problematic because it's trivial filler and also not verifiable through the map, which doesn't show K-116 at all (because it's not part of the network).

Ok  Fixed

• "six dangerous sharp turns, identified by the SHC" would be better as "six sharp curves that were "deemed dangerous" by the SHC."

 Fixed

SounderBruce 06:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SounderBruce: All problems should be fixed now. One question: for reference #1, what should I make the title since there isn't one? -420Traveler (talk) 15:27, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finally good enough to pass. Please try to take some of this advice and apply it to other articles before nominating them for GAN, as I can see this is a reoccurring issue. SounderBruce 04:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]