Talk:Cornelius Pass Road/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: TheTechie (talk · contribs) 02:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 04:53, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): 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, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Welcome to GA. This article is getting there but will need work to improve the route description to not be original research-y (this is an issue with roads pages sometimes) as well as general updating and filling the 19th century–1989 gap. My spot check raised some content that could be incorporated. Ping me when addressed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:28, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Did you know? If you fancy doing so, I always have plenty of GA nominees to review. Just look for the all-uppercase titles in the Television section. Reviews always appreciated.

 Mostly done: Thanks for the review, Sammi Brie! I have improved the article with most of the things you suggested. I was not able to find sources for the Intel statement and wasn't able to change the history section to avoid proseline, but I added all of the other fixes that you suggested. I hope this page will become a good article now! If you reply here, please ping me. Thanks, TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 23:56, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

I think we got there anyway. I added a bit of connective tissue on Intel, as well. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Copy changes

• The lead should mention something of its traffic issues and be a better summary of the article's contents.

Route description

• I would read Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Using maps as sources. You need to be careful to not make original research claims that a map cannot alone provide. For instance, the Intel item probably needs refs (the 2003 Oregonian article mentions it being a major commuter route for its Ronler Acres plant).
• near Quatama station near the Orenco Woods Nature Park Double "near ... near" construction is awkward
• The former country road handles 11,000 drivers each day and is an arterial route from the Tualatin Valley between Hillsboro to the Columbia River north of Portland. A mountainous road at points, 1,500 of the 11,000 vehicles each day are tractor-trailers on the road designed to handle up to 10,000 vehicles per day. In addition to some strange phrasing, this uses 2006 figures which are certainly out of date to be presented as current.

History

• There is a large gap between the 19th century and 1989. Newspaper access will help you fill this gap. See below.
• I wonder if a more thematic layout, particularly in re: issues related to safety as the road went from country road to commuter road (some of which are raised by the 2006 refs), would be useful. Another paragraph could be road extensions. This would be better than the proseline-ish presentation now.
• widened the road to 5 lanes between Francis and Tualatin Valley Highway from three lanes Awkward clause order. widened the road from three to five lanes between Francis and Tualatin Valley Highway
• There are several "expected to finish" sentences referencing 2023 or 2024 dates.

Sourcing and spot checks

The reason I took this on was actually because of all the page needed tags from The Oregonian. Last year, Newspapers.com added The Oregonian (and Oregon Journal should your searches be older in nature), and WP:TWL has Newspapers.com access you can apply for. So I've gone through and clipped all the articles. I suspect you or whoever added this was working off of NewsBank material given the start date when the citations start appearing?

Reviewed: 1, 4, 13, 27, 35

• There is no note in our article, matching the KGW source [35], that indicates the delay in transfer to state control was that it was upgraded to state highway standards. The article mentions a HB2017 but doesn't say when it was passed, so that might require another reference.

Also:

• Fix the titles of the 2010, 2014, and 2018 traffic tables which all read 2010.
  • They are all dead links, and two were archived (I ran WP:IABOT mid-review).
  • Is more recent data available?

Earwig catches no issues aside from a known fork, the AARoads wiki (context).

Images

The three images are libre-licensed. Consider taking the one left-aligned image and moving it into the infobox with the |image= parameter. This would prevent a bit of image-infobox sandwiching. Encouragement (not necessary for GA): Add descriptive alt text to improve accessibility.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.