# Talk:Washington State Route 261

This review is transcluded from Talk:Washington State Route 261/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: TCN7JM (talk · contribs) 04:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Intentions on reviewing this article tomorrow afternoon. Hey, maybe even tonight if I'm up to it. –TCN7JM 04:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  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): 

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: I haven't had time to read the entire article yet. I'll get back to you this afternoon when I return to my house.
Pass/Fail:
Major intersections

SR 261 doesn't really need to be mentioned in the Notes column on concurrency termini. I don't think it's against the MoS, but it just needlessly takes up space.
I was a bit confused when reading for the first time. In the third intersection, SR 260 isn't mentioned in the Destinations, but it says the route ends in the Notes. I'd put SR 260 in the Destinations column and use |dir1=ends.
Lead

Similar to SR 285, you need to change the conversion template so that "long" is connected to "mile" with a hyphen. Other than that, this section is fine.
Route description

Same conversion template issue as in the lead is in the first sentence of this section.
I would change "east of the town Starbuck" to "east of the town of Starbuck."
Does SR 261 really pass under Palouse Falls State Park?
I was confused on the "eastern terminus of SR 260" sentence, but I can't think of a better way to put it, so I'll leave it.
"SR 261 continues north into farmland, being accessed by an estimated daily average of 3,000 vehicles in 2011,[9] and crosses..." this is a pretty poor transition. I still suggest you move the traffic information into a different paragraph. If not that, at least a different sentence.
"a diamond interchange with I-90 and US 395 southeast Ritzville..." Did you mean southeast of Ritzville?
History

"The Mullan Road was constructed in 1862 and crossed the Snake River with a ferry crossing at Lyons Ferry until the completion of the Lower Monumental Dam downstream in 1969 forced longer wait times and the construction of the Snake River Bridge." I have a couple of problems with this sentence...
1) You should mention that this was a reconstruction of the bridge, not its initial construction, which was in the 1920s.
2) How could the completion of the dam have spurred the reconstruction of the bridge when the dam was completed in 1969 and the bridge was reconstructed a year earlier?
We got the parentheses issue again. SSH 11B doesn't need to be written out in full, because...well, you know why.
Now that I mention it, that happens in the lead, too.
"but the section between Starbuck and Washtucna wasn't paved." Is there a reference for this?
I'm holding on the review. There is much that needs to be fixed, but I know you can do it. –TCN7JM 00:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Addressed all your concerns and made the appropriate fixes. SounderBruce 05:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
I made a few changes myself, most of which were commas to improve readability. Great job overall! I'll pass the article. –TCN7JM 05:37, 20 January 2013 (UTC)