Talk:Interstate 59 in Alabama

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 talk 23:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that in 2018, the I-59 and I-65 interchange in Birmingham, Alabama (Malfunction Junction) carried 160,000 vehicles instead of 80,000 as it was intended to hold?
  • Reviewed:
Created by NoobThreePointOh (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

You need a link to Interstate 59 somewhere in the lead (preferably the very first sentence) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will do that ASAP. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did so, sorry for the potential edit conflict. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 14:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Liliana. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. -- Reconrabbit 16:15, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Interstate 59 in Alabama/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: NoobThreePointOh (talk · contribs) 15:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has been waiting long enough. I'll provide my review. -- Reconrabbit 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NoobThreePointOh: I've completed my review. There are a couple suggestions on sources but this meets GA criteria. -- Reconrabbit 16:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

  • Lead summarizes the relevant points in the full article. checkY
  • Annual average daily traffic along the Interstate varied varied or varies?
  • Route description uses map references to support prose in a manner consistent with other interstate articles. checkY
  • A link with an approximate length of 1.6 miles (2.6 km) between Avenue V to Arkadelphia Road, another 1.6-mile (2.6 km) section from Avenue I to Avenue V, and a link with an approximate length of 0.5 miles (0.80 km) with a link of Arkadelphia Road over US 78 This sentence has no verb.
  • Malfunction Junction first paragraph needs to be updated.

References

  • Layout: Use of reflist is good, and all of these references use cite templates, which is good, but...
  • There are a couple references that have copy-pasted or incorrect access dates. A couple are in 2018 and one is in 2007. Check if the links still work and update the access dates if you can.

Spot checking

Based on this revision:

  • [11] checkY - though "most" commonly referred to could be challenged
  • [16] checkY
  • [19] checkY
  • [25] checkY
  • [33] checkY
  • [36] checkY, can be combined with identical source [3]
  • [38] does not work. Same as [39] Added archive link, supports text, though it might bear stressing that the bridge was entirely replaced. checkY
  • [42] checkY
  • [43] checkY - news article states "just over" 70 million, "approximately" is a good compromise
  • [48] checkY
  • Thanks for clipping the Newspapers.com sources.
  • Phrases that are similar in sources have been reworked, close paraphrasing is minimal as there are only so many ways to state the cost of a highway or the locations that were connected.

    • Scope

    • Broad: A description of the route and its history is included. checkY
    • Narrow: Additional information expected on an interstate article is provided (comparing to other GAs), including exits, history by time period, and auxiliary exits. checkY

    Stability

    • Neutrality: No evidence of bias towards or against the subject, the motorists who drive on it, the authorities who built it or are responsible for it. Does not include "weasel words" or the like.
    • Edit warring: No major changes, other than those identified in the DYK nomination and shortly afterwards, have occurred from editors other than the nominator

    Images

    • Free/Fair use: All images have free use licenses or are public domain. File:I20I59Birmingham.JPG, which is an "own work" image from years ago, is believable.
    • Relevance: Images are relevant to the text alongside it
    Good Article review progress box
    Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
    3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
    Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
    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.
    allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Interstate_59_in_Alabama