The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 10:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

---

California State Route 75[edit]

California State Route 75 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/California State Route 75/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): Rschen7754 09:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Time to move to the coast for a changeup from my last FAC! It's time for a beachfront highway, involving a toll bridge! Rschen7754 09:37, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. I reviewed this one at HWY ACR. I feel this article meets FA standards. TCN7JM 11:49, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - I also reviewed this at ACR and feel it meets all the FA criteria. Dough4872 16:30, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Former toll bridge! I love CA 75. In fact I was Foursquare mayor of it until last week. ;) I'm a little surprised of Coronado Cays being deserving of a redlink, but I suppose it is more than just a neighborhood, it's a geographic feature and does warrant future treatment. One question: the southern terminus is described as being "near San Ysidro". I'm not keen on the standards of these articles, but should this read San Ysidro or San Diego? Do we usually go with the neighborhood rather than the city? --Golbez (talk) 20:35, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm actually not sure, to be honest. :/ I'm leaning towards San Ysidro since the two are separated, but open to further input. --Rschen7754 21:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. (having stumbled here from my FAC) Very well sourced and comprehensive. Nice job, — Cirt (talk) 21:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- I agree entirely with the above comments and support, and recognize upon reading this article that this is a superbly referenced, comprehensively, and well-written article that meets and exceeds the FA criteria. I cannot find anything to criticise about this article and applaud the article's editor(s) for his/her(their) work.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support -- Article well written and well referenced. Almost no errors except for one little spelling mistake but I fixed it so it is good now. The only thing is I think the article could be made even better if more pictures were added. And I loved the pictures that were included in the articel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misspea213 (talk • contribs)
• Comment – I can't let this FAC go without at least one constructive comment, which is all I found when I read the article. From Construction: "In November, funds were allocated to acquire land for the construction in the 1953-1954 state budget." An en dash is needed for the year range. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:21, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. --Rschen7754 00:24, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the ((featured article candidates)) template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Graham Colm (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.