![]() | Ranch to Market Road 187 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The lead needs to summarize all of the article, and it currently does not. Some more information, in general, from the RD and H sections should be summarized and added to the lead. I would also repeat the longest RM factoid right up in the lead. The RD and H sections could use a little copy editing to mix up the text a little. Instead of just "it" to refer to the roadway, use things like "the roadway" or "the highway" or "the road" or RM 187 once in a while for a little variety. If these two things are done, the article would warrant promotion to B-Class. Imzadi 1979 → 07:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Note to Good Article Reviewers, The reference for the Seven Days in Utopia subsection does not directly state that parts of the movie were filmed on the road, but if you use streetview on Google Maps to verify, you will see that many of the locations shown on the reference are located along RM 187.
Just a note, Awardgive, the editor with the msitaken name. 01:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dough4872 ( talk · contribs) 03:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
I will put the article on hold for fixes to be made. Dough 48 72 03:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Just a note to the nominator and the reviewer, I found matching imagery for two photos that were in this article on Google Street View, and Google copyrights that imagery. The photos have been tagged for deletion on Commons and removed from this article. They were obvious photographs of the Google Street View imagery on a computer screen. (I could see reflections in the sky on the one photo that looked like furniture.) Imzadi 1979 → 18:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
That leaves footnote 2, which could be argued is a primary source, but given that the footnote is used for one single sentence, it can't be argued that the article relies on a primary source. Imzadi 1979 → 02:33, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite map}}
: Text "section EK2–EM2" ignored (
help)) If the paper map citation is changed, you're down to two TxDOT footnotes left, both of which are secondary sources. (As I said, the highway designation file is a compilation of dates from the minute orders which are the primary sources, and a fact sheet on the FM/RM system which is used for one sentence is a compilation of facts from department logs and other documents.)It is not WP:OR to cross reference a filming location (the exterior of the garage and restaurant in this case) with its address on Google Maps to derive that the filming location is on Main Street, which also happens to be RM 187. I'm invoking WP:BRD here. You were bold in removing it, you have now been reverted, and the onus is now on you to discuss the situation so that we may come to a consensus on how to move forward. Please assume good faith by coming to the table to discuss this since you seem unwilling to drop the stick on the article. Imzadi 1979 → 07:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm trying to understand what this dispute is about (the above discussion is about the problems with the text, but that's only half the story.) Thanks to this revert war, I'm having to dig through historical revisions. Is this really necessary? This is an article on a secondary state highway. My $.02, by wikipedia tradition that is notable enough for an article, but just barely, and not likely to generate a lot of web traffic. If this article is in a less than optimal state for 3 days while this is discussed, no big deal, it's not like this article going to be widely referenced by CNN in a news story this week. As such, this revert war is silly and smacks of immaturity. With that said, Assuming the Utopiatexas.info site is reliable, using a cross reference to google maps isn't ideal, but passes muster. This would be no different that using google maps to get the latitude and longitude of the Eiffel Tower, Walt Disney World, or Mount Blanc, and this has passed muster in FAC many, many times. If you're going to scream murder over that, you are essentially saying we need to demote every FA that has coordinates in the title, as in 99% of the cases they came from google maps or similar mapping services. However, my question is, is Utopiatexas.info a reliable site? I haven't dug deeply, but the copyright notice implies it is an official site of the municipality, but it also has the same author listed at the footer of every page on the site, with a gmail.com email address, which more resembles the practice on personal websites. Dave ( talk) 00:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
![]() | Ranch to Market Road 187 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The lead needs to summarize all of the article, and it currently does not. Some more information, in general, from the RD and H sections should be summarized and added to the lead. I would also repeat the longest RM factoid right up in the lead. The RD and H sections could use a little copy editing to mix up the text a little. Instead of just "it" to refer to the roadway, use things like "the roadway" or "the highway" or "the road" or RM 187 once in a while for a little variety. If these two things are done, the article would warrant promotion to B-Class. Imzadi 1979 → 07:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Note to Good Article Reviewers, The reference for the Seven Days in Utopia subsection does not directly state that parts of the movie were filmed on the road, but if you use streetview on Google Maps to verify, you will see that many of the locations shown on the reference are located along RM 187.
Just a note, Awardgive, the editor with the msitaken name. 01:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Dough4872 ( talk · contribs) 03:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
I will put the article on hold for fixes to be made. Dough 48 72 03:49, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Just a note to the nominator and the reviewer, I found matching imagery for two photos that were in this article on Google Street View, and Google copyrights that imagery. The photos have been tagged for deletion on Commons and removed from this article. They were obvious photographs of the Google Street View imagery on a computer screen. (I could see reflections in the sky on the one photo that looked like furniture.) Imzadi 1979 → 18:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
That leaves footnote 2, which could be argued is a primary source, but given that the footnote is used for one single sentence, it can't be argued that the article relies on a primary source. Imzadi 1979 → 02:33, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
{{
cite map}}
: Text "section EK2–EM2" ignored (
help)) If the paper map citation is changed, you're down to two TxDOT footnotes left, both of which are secondary sources. (As I said, the highway designation file is a compilation of dates from the minute orders which are the primary sources, and a fact sheet on the FM/RM system which is used for one sentence is a compilation of facts from department logs and other documents.)It is not WP:OR to cross reference a filming location (the exterior of the garage and restaurant in this case) with its address on Google Maps to derive that the filming location is on Main Street, which also happens to be RM 187. I'm invoking WP:BRD here. You were bold in removing it, you have now been reverted, and the onus is now on you to discuss the situation so that we may come to a consensus on how to move forward. Please assume good faith by coming to the table to discuss this since you seem unwilling to drop the stick on the article. Imzadi 1979 → 07:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I'm trying to understand what this dispute is about (the above discussion is about the problems with the text, but that's only half the story.) Thanks to this revert war, I'm having to dig through historical revisions. Is this really necessary? This is an article on a secondary state highway. My $.02, by wikipedia tradition that is notable enough for an article, but just barely, and not likely to generate a lot of web traffic. If this article is in a less than optimal state for 3 days while this is discussed, no big deal, it's not like this article going to be widely referenced by CNN in a news story this week. As such, this revert war is silly and smacks of immaturity. With that said, Assuming the Utopiatexas.info site is reliable, using a cross reference to google maps isn't ideal, but passes muster. This would be no different that using google maps to get the latitude and longitude of the Eiffel Tower, Walt Disney World, or Mount Blanc, and this has passed muster in FAC many, many times. If you're going to scream murder over that, you are essentially saying we need to demote every FA that has coordinates in the title, as in 99% of the cases they came from google maps or similar mapping services. However, my question is, is Utopiatexas.info a reliable site? I haven't dug deeply, but the copyright notice implies it is an official site of the municipality, but it also has the same author listed at the footer of every page on the site, with a gmail.com email address, which more resembles the practice on personal websites. Dave ( talk) 00:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)