# Talk:New York State Route 321

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
The writing should be much better. Almost every sentence in the lead and the route description begins with "Route 32...". Also, the lead could be trimmed down a little bit, as right now it is equal to over a third of the total article size. Additionally, some of the links are redirects
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
Seems accurite, well sourced.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Ditto.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
Yep.
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
An image of the actual road would be nice, but it's fine.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Everything seems fine except for the writing, which still has a while to go before being considered good. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

All done according my recent edits.Mitch32contribs 22:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)