This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Oregon and California Railroad Revested Lands article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Oregon and California Railroad Revested Lands has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 16, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that after the
O&C Lands were revested to the United States government, 18
Oregon counties received federal payments that may have ended in 2012? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dana boomer ( talk · contribs) 14:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA, and should have my full review up shortly. Dana boomer ( talk) 14:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Overall this is a very nice article, on a subject of which I had not previously been aware. I have a few niggles with prose and referencing, so I am placing the article on hold until these can be addressed. Please let me know if you have any questions, Dana boomer ( talk) 15:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
This is a prominent, emotional, and debatable phrase in the article, not just factually descriptive: "...renewed in 2012 but at vastly reduced spending levels, leaving some counties scrambling to find new sources of funding." To wit: "vastly" and "scrambling". Greenineugene ( talk) 22:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Oregon and California Railroad Revested Lands article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Oregon and California Railroad Revested Lands has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 16, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that after the
O&C Lands were revested to the United States government, 18
Oregon counties received federal payments that may have ended in 2012? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dana boomer ( talk · contribs) 14:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA, and should have my full review up shortly. Dana boomer ( talk) 14:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Overall this is a very nice article, on a subject of which I had not previously been aware. I have a few niggles with prose and referencing, so I am placing the article on hold until these can be addressed. Please let me know if you have any questions, Dana boomer ( talk) 15:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
This is a prominent, emotional, and debatable phrase in the article, not just factually descriptive: "...renewed in 2012 but at vastly reduced spending levels, leaving some counties scrambling to find new sources of funding." To wit: "vastly" and "scrambling". Greenineugene ( talk) 22:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)