Talk:Missouri Route 164

Missouri Route 164 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 reassess it.
Review: February 4, 2018. (Reviewed version).

U.S. Roads: State highways / Missouri Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal 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	Missouri
	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.

Missouri Low‑importance

	Missouri portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. 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.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Missouri Route 164/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 03:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at this one. —Ed!^(talk) 03:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

It is reasonably well written:
History
- "Around 1933, Route Y was designated from Cardwell to Caruth,..." might go without saying, but I assume the route that became this road started out at this time as a dirt road? That should be specified otherwise it's confusing.
  - Mentioned starting as a gravel road.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 05:13, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "and it was removed and replaced by Route N in 1937." -- When you say "replaced," does this mean it was paved over the same area or is there any differentiation between routes J and N?
  - Reworded to say only the letter was changed.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 05:13, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "The entirety of Route Y was paved in 1949,[9][10] and Route N was extended to Route Y by 1953." -- Any projected costs of either of these projects? It should be a matter of public record.
  - I found the cost for the first one, still looking for the other.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 04:09, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Found the second one.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 04:48, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "An interchange was built at I-55 two years later." -- I would expect a cost of this one would be easy to find, too.
  - No cost for just the interchange, but there is one for that section of I-55.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 05:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Any projected traffic count on this road?
  - MoDOT does not offer any projections, only traffic count maps every three years.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 04:53, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable:
Pass Seeing no gaps in coverage. Cites are favored toward maps but good.
It is broad in its coverage:
Pass Though I do think the traffic counts and costs of the infrastructure are an important part of the article.
It follows the neutral point of view policy:
Pass no problems there.
It is stable:
Pass No problems there.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Pass though is it possible to include a map?
Other:
Dup links, dab links, external links and copyvio tool all check out. —Ed!^(talk) 03:26, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Source spotcheck Ref 6, Ref 14 and Ref 24 all line up with what's cited in the article.

On Hold Pending a few minor fixes. —Ed!^(talk) 03:26, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ed!: Thanks for the review.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 05:14, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on this one! Passing for GA. —Ed!^(talk) 20:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]