Talk:Pennsylvania Route 21
Pennsylvania Route 21 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. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pictures
Anyone have any pictures? If not, I guess I'll get some. Deigo (talk) 04:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
GA Review
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Pennsylvania Route 21/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
- herefor criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- PA highways, is this a WP:RS? Also, could you use an actual direct link for the Google Map, and possibly use the {{cite map}} template for citation?
- PA highways, is this a
- a (references): b (citations to
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of viewpolicy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have
- Overall:
USRD GA audit
This article has failed the USRD GA audit and will be sent to
WT:USRD for more details, and please ask me if you have any questions as to why this article failed. --Rschen7754 (T C) 07:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
]
GA Reassessment
- This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Pennsylvania Route 21/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
Largely the article does not have broad coverage, the lead is too short, and relies on
WP:SPS for the history. I will leave this up for a week for fixes to be made. --Rschen7754 06:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
]