# Talk:K-17 (Kansas highway)

This review is transcluded from Talk:K-17 (Kansas highway)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Viridiscalculus (talk · contribs) 00:15, 23 January 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: 

There are several two- and three-line paragraphs, at least as I see it. I would combine them (except for the traffic/NHS one) if possible so the prose does not look as choppy.
You should mention Waterloo in the Route description.
"K-17 was commissioned by 1932, and it first appears on the 1932 state highway map." The two assertions are kind of redundant. I would use one or the other.
There is no mention in the History on when the highway's southern terminus was settled. K-17 probably did not always end at a diamond interchange with a freeway.
I clicked the external link. It mentions a few history details that are not included here. If you can support them, you should add them.
There is still a stub template at the bottom of the article.
Everything else looks acceptable for a Good Article. I will put it on hold for you to address the above concerns.  VC  00:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have made the suggested changes to the article. I hope I have addressed your concerns. –TCN7JM 03:01, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
You addressed everything except part of the point about choppy paragraphs. The two paragraphs in the Lead should be combined into one.  VC  05:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Looks good enough to pass now.  VC  05:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on K-17 (Kansas highway). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20130411064037/http://articles.kwch.com/2013-02-07/k-96_36978685 to http://articles.kwch.com/2013-02-07/k-96_36978685
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC)