Talk:New York State Route 175

GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Slightly confused. SR 175 is part of the Seneca Turnpike. Which is named after the now-defunct Seneca Turnpike Corporation. Which is not related to the "New Seneca Turnpike". Which leads to the question... why mention the Seneca Turnpike Corporation at all? Some {{convert}} tags needed, and standalone years shouldn't be wikilinked per MOS. "Route 175 doesn't follow the original route of the Turnpike anymore" should be rewritten.

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:

Let me know if you have any questions! —Rob (talk) 00:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Everything is complete. I decided rather to remove the Seneca Turnpike mention.^Mitch32^contribs 01:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks... looks good. —Rob (talk) 02:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

This article fails MOS:SYL pretty bad...there's standalone years/decades linked all over the place. – TMF 00:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I rewrote the article on the same standard as NY 174, so I probably screwed up in a few places.^Mitch32^contribs 00:32, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

There's also at least a half-dozen non-breaking spaces that make no sense where they are used, including in the NY 174 boldface at the outset of the article, following "1800" in the lead, and between "174" and "and" in the second paragraph of the description. Also, common terms like "farmland" and "forest" shouldn't be linked per WP:OVERLINK. – TMF 00:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Done I believe. Anything else?^Mitch32^contribs 00:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The history has the same problem with the non-breaking spaces: I found one instance where "175" and "at" were joined by one. – TMF 00:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I got them all, if you could give it a lookover?^Mitch32^contribs 01:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

No...the one I pointed out above is still there. Third paragraph, second sentence. There's also one in the sentence that begins "Route 20N..." a few sentences later. After that's done, the history has serious prose issues, including misspellings, flow, and clarity ("The road went entirely unchanged again, and by 1989, was along its current alignment on Lee Mulroy Road (County Route 73)." - huh?) – TMF 01:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New York State Route 175. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120918222503/https://www.dot.ny.gov/main/bridgedata/repository/OnondagaBridgeData.pdf to https://www.dot.ny.gov/main/bridgedata/repository/OnondagaBridgeData.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 19 May 2017 (UTC)