Jump to content

Talk:K-47 (Kansas highway)

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:K-47 (Kansas highway)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lectrician2 (talk · contribs) 16:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Things needed to be edited before final review

[edit]

This is a very well written article, but I see no images of the physical road, you do have illustrations, but I just don't feel this this could qualify as a "good article" without photos of the physical roadway. Other than that, great job!

@Lectrician2:, I did add an image of the first sheild used, but can't find any photographs. Im pretty sure that they arent required for GA. -420Traveler (talk) 03:15, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I based this comment after examining other "good article" road related articles. For instance recently Japan National Route 119 was elevated to good article. While looking at this I noticed that it has photo's of the physical road. I just can't justify by feeling that this fulfills the requirements without a photo of a physical road. Maybe we could call in a 2nd opinion on this? Lectrician2 (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You could ask someone if you want. -420Traveler (talk) 19:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man I've noticed you are quite involved in good article nominations. Can I have a 2nd opinion on if I should require @420Traveler to have physical photo of the roadway? I feel that in order to meet the illustration criteria, it should at least have a photo of the physical roadway. For instance Japan National Route 119 was recently made a good article, and it has physical pictures of the roadway. I anticipate hearing your opinion on this. Thanks! Lectrician2 (talk) 23:20, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lectrician2: I checked the Good Article Criteria and in note #7 it says: "The presence of media is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if media with acceptable copyright status is appropriate and readily available, then such media should be provided." -420Traveler (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Future of this review

[edit]

At this point, you pass!