# Talk:Mississippi Highway 9W

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mississippi Highway 9W/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 18:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

will review.  MathewTownsend (talk) 18:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
review
"The route runs 20.087 mi (32.327 km) from MS 9 north of Bruce, Calhoun County north to MS 7 south of Oxford, Lafayette County." - this is hard to read. Are some commas or semicolons needed?
Fixed. Dough4872 00:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
"designated onto its current alignment in 1956" - is that the way it's said? or should it be just "to its current alignment"? or some other wording?
Reworded. Dough4872 00:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I've made one edit which you are free to revert.[1]
on hold for now.  MathewTownsend (talk) 18:58, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, I have replied to the above comments. Dough4872 00:02, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
reply
"Mississippi Highway 9W (MS 9W) is a state highway located in northern Mississippi. The route runs 20.087 mi (32.327 km) from MS 9 north of Bruce in Calhoun County and heads north to MS 7 south of Oxford in Lafayette County."
Do you mean MS 9 starts north of Bruce in Calhoun County and then heads north to MS 7 which is south of Oxford in Lafayette County?
Do you mean that MS 7 is south of Oxford in Lafayette County? Or do you man that MS 7 heads north to MS 7, then south of Oxford in Lafayette?
Sorry for being confusing.  MathewTownsend (talk) 13:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Reworded to clearly indicate where southern and northern termini are. Dough4872 16:38, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
ok, it's clearer.  MathewTownsend (talk) 17:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for  criteria (and here for what they are not)

Is it reasonably well written?
a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:

b. complies with  MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout: 

b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary: 

c. no original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
no edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Pass

Thanks for clarifying!  MathewTownsend (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mississippi Highway 9W. 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://web.archive.org/web/20110610213240/http://www.mscode.com/free/statutes/65/003/0003.htm to http://www.mscode.com/free/statutes/65/003/0003.htm
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) 13:32, 2 February 2018 (UTC)