# Talk:North Carolina Highway 231

This review is transcluded from Talk:North Carolina Highway 231/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: 420Traveler (talk · contribs) 22:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
Looks good, just a few problems
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  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):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

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: 

Infobox/lead
Add a reference to the established date in the infobox.
Easy enough, done--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Add history about the former NC 231 to the second paragraph.
I made it really general (the route didn't change much), so I hope it's okay but completed.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
It looks good. Just one question: was the former NC 231 in a different part of the state?
It was, so I added a distinction that it was in Southeastern North Carolina.--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Route description
I suggest adding traffic count info, and whether it follows or connects to the National Highway System to the first sentence.
I added it to the end of the route description. I felt it fit in better there and I also noticed that is where it is on your Kansas articles (apologies, I was looking at them before to make my articles better).--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good. And no problem, I was going to suggest you use one for a template. -420Traveler (talk) 06:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Add links to first mention of each city/county/highway.
Done, I've long been unsure if I "relink" articles after the lead.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good. 420Traveler (talk) 06:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
If there are links, add them to Emit and Samaria.
There are not, but another reviewer for my North Carolina Highway 133 article wanted me to link them anyway so I went ahead and did that.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good.
Article says North of Samaria, NC 231 crosses Turkey Creek. Near Burgess Road... Clarify what happens between Turkey Creek and Burgess Road.
Did a quick little fix by adding on to the sentence.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks great. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Article says an orientation it largely maintains for the duration of its route would "an orientation it largely maintains for the remainder of the route" sound better?
I do think that flows better so I replaced the wording.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good how you did it. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Article says NC 231 makes a turn slightly to the northeast, an orientation it follows until reaching US 64. would it sound better to change "orientation" to a different word, to avoid confusion since it was used earlier.
I changed it to direction, I think that is an appropriate differentiation but let me know if it should be something else.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Perfect word choice. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Clarify if highway crosses over or has at-grade crossing with Coastal Carolina Railway.
The article does state "crossing over a railroad operated by...". It does cross over the railroad on a bridge but I'm unsure on how to word that without it seeming to be overstated.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
I mean the crossing in the second paragraph. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Apologies, I don't know why I didn't see that one. It's at an at-grade crossing so I added that.--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
No problem, looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Add where the northern terminus located.
It was there but the wording was probably a little confusing so I changed it around.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good, but also add if its e/w/s/n etc. from what city. -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
I added "west of Spring Hope." Is that what you were looking for or the directions on the highways?--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah that looks good. -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
History
Add comma after 1935 and 1945.
Done!--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good
Miscellaneous
Add a location to all NCDOT references.
A lot of the former maps I have trouble with because if they don't tell me, they can (and often-times were) made outside of Raleigh, particularly Winston-Salem. For everything new I put Raleigh as the location.--Ncchild (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok sound good, but was Raleigh not NCDOT's predecessors' headquarters? -420Traveler (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah I believe so. I went through and added Raleigh to the maps.--Ncchild (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks good -420Traveler (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Conclusion
Everything looks good, passing the article now. -420Traveler (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2021 (UTC)