Talk:Old Baltimore Pike

	Old Baltimore Pike 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 Date Process Result July 15, 2012 Good article nominee Listed

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

U.S. Roads: Delaware Low‑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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Locations  Delaware   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. Article recognition:   A fact from this article was featured on the Did you know? section of the U.S. Roads Portal in December 2011. United States: Delaware Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Delaware (assessed as Low-importance).

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Old Baltimore Pike/GA1

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 17:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will review. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

review

Mostly wording suggestions

• per
  Mos:Slashes
  , Delaware/Maryland should be Delaware–Maryland.

• Fixed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "near Newark, Delaware east to Christiana" - does this mean near Newark, Delaware (on the east side) or that from Newark it goes east to Christiana.

• Clarified. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The road is mainly paralleled by Interstate 95 (I-95, Delaware Turnpike) to the north and U.S. Route 40 (US 40, Pulaski Highway) to the south. - do you mean these two roads are the main roads that paralled Old Baltimore Pike (although others do also)?

• Fixed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "The road was first built by 1720" - I like the wording you used below better as less awkward: "The Old Baltimore Pike was built before 1720."

• Changed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "past more residential subdivisions" and "through more suburban areas" - "more", "more" - repetitious

• Fixed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Past this intersection, Old Baltimore Pike continues past" - many "past"s

• Changed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "It then crosses a Norfolk Southern railroad line encounters DE 72." - a word left out?

• Fixed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "come to", "comes to" - can wording be varied?

• Fixed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "The road serves as a major connection between Philadelphia and Baltimore" - shouldn't this be mentioned in the lede also?

• Mentioned. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• link Welsh Tract?

• Linked. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "would be incorporated in 1813" - was incorporated

"*Changed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "Old Baltimore Pike comes to a junction with DE 273 in a wooded area. Following this, the road narrows back to two lanes and heads into the community of Christiana." (suggestion) Old Baltimore Pike reaches a junction with DE 273 in a wooded area. Then the road narrows to two lanes again and heads into the community of Christiana.

• Changed. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It would be easier to read if there were a couple of paragraphs in section that a big wall of text.

• Split some paragraphs. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Everything else is fine.

• I made an edit that you're free to change.[1]
• Will place on hold

MathewTownsend (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the review. I have replied to the above comments. Dough4872 23:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reply

I don't know. It's difficult to figure out the dates. It seems that in the 1700s it served as a "major connection between Philadelphia and Baltimore". Is that right? If so, it should be clarified in the lede. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was the main road between the two cities roughly from the 18th century until state roads came about in the 20th century. It is hard to pin down exact dates, so I simply said "in the past". Dough4872 00:38, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• ok. I made another edit:[2] MathewTownsend (talk) 11:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   a. prose:

   copyright laws

   , correct spelling and grammar:

   b. complies with

   list incorporation

   :

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:

   b. provides

   reliable sources

   where necessary:

   c. no original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Does it follow the
   neutral point of view
   policy.

   fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   no edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have

   fair use rationales

   :

   b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with

   suitable captions

   :

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Pass!

Good work! MathewTownsend (talk) 11:54, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]