# Talk:New York State Route 195

This review is transcluded from Talk:New York State Route 195/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 21:42, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

I happen to have a soft spot for road articles and I'm familiar with Mitchazenia's work, so why not?  A first look seems to indicate it's pretty much right there.  Red Phoenix let's talk... 21:42, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
This is a nice light read, and already very well done.  I imagine this will be a short review.
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Prose reads very well, although I have a couple of things to highlight, which I'll put below.  Article appears to be compliant with the MOS.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
I have one or two factual questions to which the answers seem unclear, but that's it.  References are properly formatted, all appear to be reliable, and I don't see any potential OR.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Routing and history are usually the two major points to any road article, and this one hits both.  Each is well covered and in-depth, but focused.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
No POV issues detected.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
No edits from March indicates a good, stable article.
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): 
Two images, both used well and with appropriate captions.  Both are free images and are marked appropriately.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Very nice.  Very well done.


### Some nitpicking notes
"NY 11B was extended west to Potsdam by the following year.[13] NY 11B was rerouted c. 1938 to continue east from Nicholville to Malone while its former routing north of Nicholville was designated as NY 195.[1][2]"  It's generally not a good idea to have two consecutive sentences start the same way; it tends to read choppy.  Can one of these sentences be started another way?
"NY 195 was first a piece of the former Route 30, a legislative route designated in 1908."  Designated by who?  The state of New York, a county, or federally?  I can see there's a link in the below section to help readers, but I think it would be helpful to have in the lead as well.
"After NY 2 and NY 2A were decommissioned in 1927 for US 11, leaving the route unnumbered for a few years."  This is a sentence fragment, not a complete sentence.
Looks great otherwise.  Should be a couple of quick fixes and then ready for a pass.  Red Phoenix let's talk... 22:01, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

All done. Also no edits since March since it was at GAN since March. Mitch32(Protection is not a principle, but an expedient.) 02:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
That's part of why I wanted to do this one, honestly.  I have one that's been the same way since April.  In any case, we're all set to pass this article.  Well done.  Red Phoenix let's talk... 03:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)