Talk:Sierra Highway/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Hi. I will be reviewing

WP:GA. Having traveled on the road many times in many different areas, I already have some background knowledge of the road. It's 3:22 am and I'm going to bed, so I'll conduct the review in the morning. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 11:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

WP:WIAGA
for criteria

Hidden GAN review


  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Fairly well written, with only a few things that didn't seem to flow right:
  • "The highway crosses a total of seven named mountain passes while in the Sierra Nevada and San Gabriel Mountains, Soledad Pass, Sherwin Summit, Deadman Summit, Conway Summit, Devil's Gate Pass, Monitor Pass and Luther Pass." Perhaps there is a missing word or two after "San Gabriel Mountains", otherwise I count nine named mountain ranges.
  • "The Sierra Highway" I don't know if "The" is part of its name, but in Santa Clarita, Lancaster, Palmdale, Rosamond and Mojave, I've never heard anyone use the "The", and it isn't used on street signs
  • "This was historically the intersection of U.S. Route 99 and U.S. Route 6; located adjacent to the modern equivalent, the Newhall Pass interchange of Interstate 5 and State Route 14." I think the semi-colon is making the second half of the sentence confusing. Try something along the lines of "This was historically the intersection of U.S. Route 99 and U.S. Route 6; it is now the Newhall Pass interchange of Interstate 5 and State Route 14."
  • "Route 14" vs. "route 14" / "Route 89" vs "route 89": be consistent throughout
  • "however the three transportation arteries use different paths up the mountains" A number of style guides, in particular The Elements of Style say correct usage of "however" here would be to precede it with a semi-colon and place a comma directly after it.
  • "however the upgraded expressway was essentially built, same thing here for However. Also, I don't find "essentially" to be completely encyclopedic in
    WP:TONE
    . Is there another word we could use, or drop it all together?
  • "There are currently" is not specific and will age rather quickly. How do you feel about "As of 2009"?
  • "'Just wWest of the separation"
  • Lede says "The second part signed as Sierra Highway is the portion of US 395 just west of Bishop", but main prose says "North of Bishop, US 395 was rebuilt on a new alignment". I found it hard to understand whether it is west or north of Bishop.
  • In the US 395/SR 89 section, it doesn't explicitly say whether Sierra Highway is its own road, or shares its route with either SR14 or US395.
  • "The Camino Sierra separates from US 395" I believe this should be "El Camino Sierra separates from US 395"
  • "From here to Lake Tahoe the trail follows SR 89" Coming from England, my idea of a trail is an unpaved road for hiking or horseriding. I don't know if this differs from America. There is no previous mention of it being a trail, so I found this to be a harsh jump. WRT "follows", I believe it shares its route with SR-89, but "follows" read like it runs parallel to CA-89
  • "However, Caltrans closes route 89 over Monitor Pass during winter months." I think "however" can be dropped and the sentence will still make sense.
  • Perhaps wikilink "prospectors"
  • "This book had an article" --> "This book contained an article"
  • "In 1964, As part of the 1964 state highway renumbering" I think "In 1964, " can be dropped, but if not, there's a capital "A" mid-sentence
  • "The Film,": sentence case
  • "one of the trucks used in the movie is still on the road and in the process of being restored. The current owner of the truck has driven the truck along Sierra Highway for nostalgia, enjoying the terrified looks he receives from passing motorists who recognize the truck." has four quick repetitions of "truck". I think the second and third times could be simply, "The current owner has driven it along Sierra Highway"
I have either fixed or responded to all suggestions in this section.
talk) 06:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  1. B. MoS compliance:
  • MOS:TITLE
    : Film titles and names of newspapers should be italicised
  • WP:OVERLINK
    slight overlinking on road names. U.S. Route 6 is linked at least twice in the main prose, and State Route 89 should be linked on its first use.
What I have intended to do is wikilink on the first mention under each Level 2 heading. If I've missed any, please advise.
talk) 06:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  • "US 6" vs "U.S. 6"
Per
talk) 06:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  • MOS:NUM
    : 1970's --> 1970s
I have either fixed or responded to all suggestions in this section.
talk) 06:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  2. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
While waiting of the photo authors to chime in (see below) I'll look into it.
talk) 06:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  • In reviewing this article, I looked at other road GAs.
    US 50
    could be given.
I had a discussion on weather to include a major intersections table with another editor on the U.S. Roads wikiproject. Our two person consensus =-) was not to include one. We decided that, for the portions no longer under state control, as well as the 14U portion, no reliable source exists. The only way we could get the mileage figures is via map estimates, or actually driving the route at 10mph and recording the
talk) 18:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  • I think that the article should mention which counties the road passes through.
Done
talk) 06:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  1. B. Focused:
  2. Is it
    neutral
    ?
    Fair representation without bias:
  3. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  4. 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
    :
    some more images of the road would be good. I know Panoramio has a lot of images of the route, have you checked to see if any are licensed under the Creative Commons?
I have found this one [1] that is licenced CC-ND. I've emailed the uploader to see if he would be willing to remove the ND clause, so I can upload to commons.
talk) 05:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
  • A map of the route for the infobox would be good. If you can't find anyone to do it, I can create one.
I'll ask at
WP:USRD/MTF
. See what happens.
  1. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    I have placed the nomination on hold for seven days so the prose and MOS points can be addressed. Overall it's good, and I'll be happy to pass it once they've been taken care of. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the review. I'll try to respond to your suggestions this week.
talk) 18:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Returning

Article looks great. Personally, I'd like to see a major intersections table. Mapquest or something could be used to calculate the distances for non-State-controlled sections, but if you guys at the WikiProject feel it would be better not to then that's fine. Before I make it official, let's just wait a couple more days and see if we can get any other images and/or a map. (I found this courtesy of the LA County public library, but am unsure of the correct licensing.) Otherwise, great job! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I went to the local library today to find a hard copy of the image I linked to above. I found it, and the date and have added it to the article in the History section. I have also promoted the article to

WP:GA. If you decide to take this to FAC, I still think it needs a map and intersection table. Otherwise, well done! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 08:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks for the review. FYI, I am looking into a major intersections table for the portion that is not redundant with numbered highways. I've found some "official" info on Sierra Highway on the LA CO DPW (Department of Public Works) website, but no mileage logs. If I can't find anything, I can use google maps, but having an official source is better. Thanks again.
talk) 16:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sierra_Highway/GA1&oldid=1126874877"