Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Washington State Route 520/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 promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 23:21, 13 January 2018 [1].

Washington State Route 520 edit

Nominator(s): SounderBruce 05:00, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This highway is the bane of thousands of daily commuters in the Seattle area, with its daily bouts of congestion (in both directions, twice a day) and never-ending construction. It connects the headquarters of tech giants Amazon and Microsoft using the world's longest and widest floating bridge, which was recently completed to replace a decades-old bridge. SounderBruce 05:00, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Rschen7754

Noting that I do intend to take a look at this, though unfortunately it might not be until after the holiday period. --Rschen7754 19:41, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • number of axles - of the vehicle?
    • Fixed.
  • The concept of "lidded park" is not clear and it may run afoul of WP:NEO.
    • Replaced with "park lid", which is a pretty neutral term, and a link to this list. SounderBruce 02:49, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More later. --Rschen7754 02:01, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • which continued east towards Redmond - not clear what this is referring to
    • Fixed.
  • and the eastern approach to Houghton and Bellevue at a temporary interchange with 104th Avenue Northeast - something seems missing, like an "up to"
    • Fixed.
  • already had a HOV lane installed in the 1980s - this is a bit awkward
    • Rewrote and updated the section.
  • Mass transit - do we have statistics later than 2009?
  • Inflation has been switched to US-GDP.
    • @SounderBruce: This should be switched to GDP from what it currently is; I'm told that it is more accurate. (Some other USRD FAs were switched over recently). --Rschen7754 05:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Rschen7754: Thanks for the tip. Switched over to GDP figures and updated the billion-dollar estimate for the project while I was at it. SounderBruce 05:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This completes the review. --Rschen7754 00:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review edit

Mainly, just a few minor format points:

  • Refs 7, 20, 21, 33: HistoryLink not being a printed source, should not be italicised
  • Ref 11: likewise "Crosscut"
  • Ref 12: link goes to a blank page, as does the archived link
  • Ref 32: For some reason you've added "Associated Press" to this Seattle Times citation, but not to the others.

Otherwise, sources look in good order and of appropriate quality and reliability. Brianboulton (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brianboulton: Thanks for the source review.
  • I have un-italicized HistoryLink, but kept Crosscut italicized, as it is an online newspaper. Un-italicizing it would mean, for consistency, some Post-Intelligencer links would switch (as it has been an online newspaper since 2009).
  • Ref 12: The link works for me (Chrome on Windows 8.1) as a PDF that is embedded into the page, so it seems to be a plugin issue. There is an interactive version of the map, but it is harder to archive.
  • Refs 32 and 36: These two Times articles originated from the AP, and credited as such, while the others were original reports.
Hope that addressed some of your concerns. SounderBruce 05:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm happy. Brianboulton (talk) 04:52, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. Well done. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 03:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dough4872:

  1. In the first paragraph of the lead, you begin two consecutive sentences with "SR 520".
    1. Fixed, though I had to throw out the mention of 520 being a "major regional freeway".
  2. Since you defined the abbreviation for Interstate 5 is I-5, you do not need to do the same for I-405. Therefore it should say "SR 520 intersects several state highways, including Interstate 5 (I-5) in Seattle, I-405 in Bellevue, and SR 202 in Redmond."
    1. Fixed.
  3. "The original Evergreen Point Floating Bridge was opened in 1963 as a replacement for the cross-lake ferry system that had operated since the turn of the century.", turn of what century? Better to clarify here, i.e. "beginning of 20th century" or whatever might work better.
    1. Fixed.
  4. You do not need to define what SR 920 stands for as you already defined what SR X stands for in the first sentence. Therefore it should say "replacing the temporary designation of SR 920"
    1. Fixed.
  5. Make sure to wikilink some of the places in the lead if they are not already linked there.
    1. Added two missing links.
  6. Again do not need to define what I-5 stands for.
    1. Fixed.
  7. How many lanes wide is SR 520? This should be mentioned in the route description.
    1. Generally six lanes (2 HOV + 4 GP), but there's some exit lanes and a C-D system thrown in. I added a mention of the HOV lanes and the six-lane portion on the bridge.
  8. In the first section of the history, I-5 and I-405 should be abbreviated.
    1. Fixed.
  9. In the second section of the history, SR 520 should be abbreviated.
    1. Changed to emphasize the 1964-era name for the highways (later changed to State Route in 1970).
  10. What local roads did SR 520 use for its temporary route?
    1. Added the two roads and map references.
  11. Do we need to use the formal name for the bridge in the exit list? I think the common name would be better here. Dough4872 02:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Fixed. Thanks for the review. SounderBruce 02:40, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Article looks good now! Dough4872 02:54, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose Comments by Finetooth

  • This is clear, informative, and highly detailed. I made a small number of minor edits, and I have only two suggestions.
Route description
  • ¶4 "...a Highway of Statewide Significance, which includes highways...". – Modify slightly to "...Highway of Statewide Significance, a category that includes highways..."?
General
  • Alt text looks fine.
  • No dead URLs.
  • No problems with disambiguation.
  • Many duplicate links. About 15 such as Roanoke Park are linked in the "Route description" and then linked again in the lower sections. I doubt that any main-text duplicates are necessary.
  • @Finetooth: Reworded that sentence in the Route description and removed all the duplicate links I found in the history section. SounderBruce 23:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks fine. Switching to support on prose. Happy New Year. Finetooth (talk) 02:16, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Adityavagarwal

Support—I gave this article a read the other night, and I offered my comments to SounderBruce off-wiki. I've made a few other minor edits along the way, but I feel this article is ready and merits promotion. Imzadi 1979 → 07:28, 10 January 2018 (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/Washington_State_Route_520/archive1&oldid=820480028"