Contents

Talk:Pennsylvania Route 12

	Pennsylvania Route 12 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassessit.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 25, 2012 Good article nominee Listed February 26, 2012 WikiProject A-class review Not approved
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. U.S. Roads: State highways / Pennsylvania Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Topics  U.S. state highways   Locations  Pennsylvania   This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it. This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists. This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it. Article recognition:   This article was the selected article of the Pennsylvania task forceinMay 2012.

• Oppose. The Warren Street Bypass is not PA 12 along its entire length - its southern extent is part of US 222/US 422. --TMF ^{Let's Go Mets - Stats} 04:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pennsylvania Route 12/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Viridiscalculus (talk · contribs) 00:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a(prose): b(MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a(references): b(citations to reliable sources): c(OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• Do not use interchange as a verb; that is not a proper use of the word in the context of highways.
  • Fixed. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• In modern English, proper creek names do not take preceeding definite article. Remove "the" prior to Tulpehocken Creek in the Lead and in subsequent references.
  • Removed. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "PA 12 was designated onto..." Incorrect conjunction. Replace with "PA 12 was assigned to..."
  • Changed. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The western terminus interchange is complex. Describe that a little more instead of just saying "an interchange." Identify the cross-freeway (West Shore Bypass?) and mention which routes follow it in which direction. Also mention the two missing movements.
  • Added more details about interchange. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• You should describe the other interchanges along the road as partial cloverleaf or whatever if applicable, even if they are missing ramps.
  • Described. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• The portion of the highway between its terminus and PA 183 has a few businesses that are directly accessed from the highway, so this stretch is not a freeway or even controlled-access. Be sure to avoid implying this stretch is a freeway, but do mention there is no cross-traffic. Mention the streets used from the RIRO interchanges to access PA 183 and that the route becomes freeway after the PA 183 RIROs.
  • Clarified which stretches are freeway. Mentioned names of local streets that provide access to PA 183. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• There is excessive mention of surroundings. Much of this highway is a freeway, so unless the scenery is obvious and/or accessible from the road, cut down on the surrounding descriptions. For instance, the residential subdivisions on either side of the freeway between US 222 Bus and 11th Street are barely visible from the freeway.
  • Reduced surrounding descriptions along freeway segment. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Since the Route description is 3 1/2 paragraphs, I do not think you need subsections. The Main template is also unnecessary because you provide a link to the Warren Street Bypass in the Lead and this article is better than that article. I suggest integrating the AADT info into the other paragraphs and moving the NHS sentence to the Lead.
  • Removed subheaders and hatnote. I think it is easier to mention the highest and lowest traffic counts along with the NHS data at the end of the route description, but I am not opposed to mentioning them sat the beginning of the route description. I think it would he hard to follow if the traffic counts were integrated into the route description and I feel the NHS data should be presented somewhere in the route description as opposed to only in the lead. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • You have a good point. It is at least a little awkward either way, but my idea is more awkward. The last paragraph can stay as is.  VC  20:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• US 422 is mentioned as part of Harrisburg Pike. US 222 is mentioned as part of Allentown Pike. Be sure to mention the current name of the relevant portion of the highway to provide context because the road names may have changed in the last 50-60 years. Looking at maps, I did not see any road named Park Street Extension. You need to let the reader know which existing road that is for context.
  • Added names of current roads. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• It is not clear when the Schuylkill Avenue overpass was built. Mention that when talking about the extension of the Warren Street Bypass.
  • Added when bridge was built. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• "The newly-opened Warren Street Bypass included an interchange with the under-construction Reading Bypass southwest of the Tulpehocken Creek." Clarify that this was the case in 1959, instead of using the ambiguous phrase "newly-opened."
  • Fixed. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I do not think it is necessary to have a line saying end of freeway because there is no line saying start of freeway.
  • I think this line is critical as it shows the difference between what intersections are interchanges along the freeway and what intersections are at-grade intersections. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Alternatively, you can mention in the notes column the type of interchange for each of the junctions. If you do that, you should merge the first two lines (both 0.00) together.  VC  20:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it would be wordy to mention the type of interchanges as it is also redundant to the RD. Also, I do not know what type of interchange the US 222/US 422 interchange would be classified as. Dough4872 21:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I am probably being a little nitpicky here and I cannot come up with a better rationale, so I will allow this point to be sustained. However, I think this could be an issue if you decide to nominate this article at ACR.  VC  22:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You should use the Reading map for the National Highway System reference.
  • Changed reference. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• The Reading Eagle references should have page numbers.
  • Added page numbers. Dough4872 19:53, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• The map sources should have section grid numbers, if they exist on a particular map.
  • Added where applicable. Dough4872 20:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Add non-breaking spaces throughout the article.
  • Added. Dough4872 20:25, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• This is a nice article, but it needs a little more work before it can be promoted.  VC  18:41, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will pass this article now. Congratulations on another Good Article.  VC  22:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]