# Talk:Ontario Highway 51

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ontario Highway 51/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 03:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Floydian τ ¢
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 03:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: .
b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Check for WP:WTW:  None 
Check for WP:EMBED:   Done

The table is standard in such articles. Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416

2: Verifiable with no original research

a. Has an appropriate reference section:  Yes
b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  very good Checked other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416

c. No original research:   Done

3: Broad in its coverage

4: Neutral

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc:  Yes
6: Images   Done (Cross-checked with other FAs - Ontario Highway 401 & Ontario Highway 416.) 

As per the above checklist, the issues are:

Include exact points in place of "two separate provincially maintained highways" in the first sentence of the lead.

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm delighted to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

That may be tought to do in this instance. Like it says, there were two separate highways with the number, both of which have their endpoint mentioned. Do you think I should mention the more recent incarnation in the lede sentence and then mention the older route after? - Floydian τ ¢ 23:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
A tough question for me to answer too. I think we should mention the latest answer to "What?" in the first sentence. Then the rest should follow as it is. At present, we need to read till the end to get a jist of it's "definition". But you have the most comprehensive knowledge of the article scope. So feel free to tweak the lede as you like, as long as it's clear and to the point. Update me when you're done. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 02:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Ok. Took a complete rewrite of the lede, but should be good to go. Cheers, Floydian τ ¢ 23:21, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Perfect.--Seabuckthorn ♥ 23:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 23:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot II has detected links on Ontario Highway 51 which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global
If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://g.co/maps/hmer
Triggered by (?<!-)\bg\.co\b on the global blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 01:43, 7 September 2014 (UTC)