Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Interstate 68/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 18:41, 21 March 2009 [1].

Interstate 68 edit

Nominator(s): Algorerhythms (talk)

This article has been interesting to write, and I think it's ready for a shot at FA status. Go ahead and review the article; it won't bite. It won't even tip over a gas tanker. Algorerhythms (talk) 05:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments -

  • Newspapers titles in the references should be in italics. If you're using {{cite news}}, use the work field for the title of the paper, and the publisher field for the name of the actual company that publishes the paper
    I've changed it so that for newspapers the work field is used. Does the same apply for TV stations, or are they considered publishers?
TV stations are fine un-italicised. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:25, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please spell out abbreviations in the notes
    I changed the ones I've found. If I missed any, let me know. - Algorerhythms (talk) 16:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:42, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tech. review from Truco (talk · contribs)

Dabs and external links (toolbox)
  • Are found up to speed.
Ref formatting (WP:REFTOOLS)
  • The following ref names are used for more than 1 different ref.
  • ...are now up to speed as well--₮RUCӨ 15:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Article is well done for a two-digit interstate :) - I believe that this meets all FA criteria. :) - Mitch32(Go Syracuse) 23:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why does the junction list have state columns? That's not WP:ELG compliant. -- M*gill*FR (blab to me) 21:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    And now it doesn't anymore. - Algorerhythms (talk) 21:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    That was my only concern in the entire article, and it is now addressed. I would support the article to FA. -- M*gill*FR (blab to me) 22:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments

More roadgeek feedback. The lead states this freeway was built along the National Road corridor, however the History section does not cover this aspect of the highway's history. I'd suggest adding a paragraph to the history section to briefly discuss National Road, and its significance as one of the first bills signed into law by the US Congress and seen as one of the tests of the strengths of the Union goverment versed the former articles of confederation, etc. This would establish the notability and hopefully give the article more appeal to history buffs and not just roadgeeks. =-).Dave (talk) 23:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments - I have some concerns with the article before I will support it for FA:
  1. For the mileage reference, is there a more official source for the West Virginia mileage?
  2. In the lead, you abbreviate too much, such as "Interstate 79 (I-79)". Is it nessecary to include all these abbreviations (with the exception of the I-68 abbreviation)?
  3. In the lead, you use "I-68" in almost every sentence. Is there any variety in wording that can be used?
  4. It may be helpful to indicate when US 48 was designated in lead
  5. "U.S. Route 48" should be bolded as this article serves as the redirect target for the Maryland-West Virginia instance of US 48. Also the wikilink goes to an unrelated US 48
  6. In Cumberland Thruway section, try to find an alternate to the word "bad"
  7. The last sentence in the first paragraph of the Cumberland Thruway section(" After the construction of I-68, this route through Cumberland became U.S. Route 40 Alternate (US 40 ALT).") may fit more approriately after the sentence "This portion connected Lee Street in west Cumberland to Maryland Avenue in east Cumberland, providing a quicker path for motorists traveling through Cumberland on US 40 and US 220." Also, in the former, "this route" should be clarifed to say "the original route"
  8. The sentence "Problems quickly emerged with the highway, especially near an area called "Moose Curve," where the road curves sharply at the bottom of Haystack Mountain, a portion of the road where traffic accidents are common" sounds a little wordy
  9. "the Appalachians" sounds colliqual
  10. Change "to have endpoints at" to "to run from"
  11. When citing two references for one sentence,they should be in numerical order. For example, instead of "[11][6]", it should be "[6][11]"
  12. Again unlink US 48 as it links to an unrelated highway, It may help to use "U.S. Route 48" here instead as you are introducing it to the reader for the first time in this section
  13. When indicating dollar amounts, you indicate "US $" for the first instance but only "$" for the rest. Do you assume that at that point the reader can assume you are referring to U.S. dollars?
  14. In "Designation as I-68" section, it may help to indicate the other designations the US 50 freeway had (US 301, MD 2).
  15. When mentioning new US 48, a wikilink to U.S. Route 48 would help
  16. In last sentence of "Designation as I-68", it may help to mention that today's I-68 was the second instance of US 48 that existed
  17. The West Virginia section of the route description seems a little short. Is there any more information that can be added?
  18. Do not overuse "then" in route description, it is redundant and we know you are describing the progression of the route
  19. Why are the traffic counts for the entire Maryland section mashed randomly in the middle? It may make more sense to move them to the end of the section.
  20. The sentence "This is the most congested section of the highway in Maryland." sounds short and unnessecary. Isn't this information already mentioned in the traffic counts?
  21. Is it nessecary to repeat information from the history in the route description?
  22. The paragraph describing the removal of WV 28 ALT signs sounds like material that would be more appropriate for the history section.
  23. Parts of the route description seem to be missing some detail, such as some of the interchanges along the route.
  24. As I have described before, the Mon-Fayette Expressway seems to drift a little from the focus of the article as it describes a different road
  25. Avoid overlinking to certain articles, such as Cumberland, Maryland and Maryland State Highway Administration. Wikilinks should only occur for the first instance in both history and route description.
  26. I see that you split up the exit list again. Is there more consensus that supports there being a separate exit list for each state or the two exit lists merged together with a state column?
  27. In exit 40 row, add missing parentheses at end
  28. Citations for current U.S. dollars should be a footnote, not a reference
  29. For reference 37, the questionability of many roadgeek sites, such as AARoads, have been called into question. However, it is probably okay to cite a picture from the site
  30. If there are any more relevant external links, it may help to add them to the external links section Dough4872 (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Is there any mention in your sources of the interstate as an alternate route for hazardous materials trucks traveling through the area? I-70, which is not far to the north in Pennsylvania, has numerous tunnels which prohibit hazardous cargo if I recall correctly. I've had to use 68 as an alternate route several times, and btw that cut in sideling hill is ginormous. I only gave the article a cursory glance and with the exception of other reviews unresolved comments everything looks alright so far. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 22:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose due to apparent incomplete research. There's no mention of the original WV 73, which provided the general alignment for I-68 between Morgantown and Bruceton Mills. This suggests that there may be more missing, and you should do some more research on the history. --NE2 02:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Interstate_68/archive1&oldid=1138463893"