# Talk:New York State Route 191

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York State Route 191/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 22:49, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:49, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Lead:
Okay, the lead may be a bit TOO much. It's probably half the size of the article - can we trim a bit of the detail from it? It probably isn't needed to mention that it starts at an intersection with a highway and ends with a junction to a highway. Perhaps "The route is co-designated by the county highway department as County Route 23 (CR 23) and heads from the hamlet of Sciota within the town of Chazy to the hamlet of Chazy."
Suggest also "The route initially extended from the community of Altona to a ferry landing on Lake Champlain at Chazy Landing, where it connected to Vermont Route F-2."
Also, the lead contains information that is not in the body of the article - "New York State Route 191 (NY 191) is a 6.24-mile (10.04 km) county-maintained state highway located north of Adirondack Park in Clinton County, New York, in the United States." I've struck through the information that is in the body of the article... the other information should be mentioned in the body of the article.
Otherwise, things are fine with this little article.
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
I've made changes except for cutting where it goes to from highway a - highway b statement. I don't feel like its a summary without that. If we don't get that sfuff in there, the reader may or may not know where it is. Mitch32(Wikipedia's worst Reform Luddite.) 16:13, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Passing now. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:10, 10 July 2013 (UTC)