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 Karanacs 15:14, 31 August 2010 [1].

---

Capitol Loop[edit]

Capitol Loop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Capitol Loop/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): Imzadi 1979 → 21:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I think the article comes very close to meeting the criteria. This is an article about a highway that's not really a highway. It is really a collection of streets downtown Lansing, Michigan, US that masquerades as a highway because that's what its parents call it. The parents decide to conceive this controversial child in 1986, but didn't manage the feat until 1989. This child was caught in the middle of controversies at the beginning. The two parents wanted to give it reconstructive plastic surgery for its 15th birthday, but others disapproved. These others almost stopped the procedure dead in its tracks, but relented when the process was scaled back. Recently, this child seems to be a bit of a speed demon, with issues surrounding speeding tickets. Hopefully you'll enjoy the article as much as I have, and suggest or make any necessary minor improvements to polish the article off. Imzadi 1979 → 21:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources comment: All sources look OK, no issues arising Brianboulton (talk) 00:44, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - The lead looks a little long, could a couple of sentences be cut out of it? Other than that, I would be willing to support this article. Dough4872 01:44, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Issues resolved. Dough4872 02:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 07:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Alt text isn't compulsory anymore, but simply saying "looking east/west" "X building" isn't going to help a blind person who needs to have the actual literal colour, shape etc described to them YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was under the impression that alt text supposed to be kept brief without long descriptions, which are best left for the body of the article. The samples given at WP:ALT indicate that "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush" based on the purpose of the photo. Any suggestions are appreciated, but the old method of full descriptions of every element of an image aren't correct anymore. Imzadi 1979 → 07:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I stand corrected YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 07:31, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Comment - looks fine. nothing stands out as improvable, maybe ther are tweaks here and there with the prose but no deal-breakers as such. beginning a look-over now. I'll jot queries below: Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... has notated it.. - " has designated it" ? The former sounds unsual and I suspect you mean the latter (?)

Yes, but aren't the labels on a map "notations"? I've switch to "labeled" for now. Imzadi 1979 → 04:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

okay. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

each three-lanes wide - the hyphen looks odd to me here. I'd leave it out...unless there is some roadmap convention I am missing.

I think that's an artifact from a previous copy-edit. Either way, the hyphen is gone. Imzadi 1979 → 05:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support –

• Route description: "The two highway designations merge and run run concurrently...". See the problem? :-)
• Proposal and creation: "with the boundaries of Ottawa, Allegan, Logan streets...". When I read this, it feels like there should be an "and" in the list of streets (after Allegan).
• Street name changes: Pretty sure reference 17 should be after the parentheses. The normal rule of thumb is to put cites after punctuation; the only time I know of when the opposite applies is with dashes. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 15:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replies:
    • Nice catch. Fixed.
    • "Ottawa, Allegan, Logan streets and the vacated section of Sycamore Street" so you think it should be "Ottawa, Allegan and Logan streets and the vacated section of Sycamore Street". That sounds like one too many ands to me. Any suggestions on how to recraft it? The only thing I can think of doing would be: "Ottawa, Allegan, Logan and Sycamore streets". How do I indicate the vacated status of Sycamore though? I got a suggestion from a friend on how to fix this.
    • Normally I would agree, but in this case, ref 17 is only for the inflation-adjusted number, while refs 16 and 18 are for the whole sentence, original dollar value and all.
  • Thanks for the comments! Imzadi 1979 → 15:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've place a notice to Giants2008 that I've replied to his comments two days ago. Imzadi 1979 → 21:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Image review
  • Most images check out; File:Michigan-Capitol-2005.jpg appears to be in good order, but could use an ((Information)) template.
  • File:Capitol Loop map.png is claimed PD, but the source of the underlying map is not given, and I doubt the editor drew it him/herself.

-- Magic♪piano 12:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • • All done, and actually using GIS data your average editor with those skills can draw maps himself. Imzadi 1979 → 13:09, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It does need to be clear that that is what was done, as opposed to (for example) scanning or copying a base map from a copyrighted source. Magic♪piano 13:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image issues addressed. Magic♪piano 13:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Comments

• • "The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has labeled it as Capitol Loop I-496 or CL I-496 on some maps, similar to that of an Interstate Highway business loop." - not quite getting the connection here.
  • The third paragraph of the lead seems a bit too detailed on first glance.
  • 2.3 - The city did not kill the project outright and risk losing the investment in the downtown infrastructure. - rephrase? The parallel structure here just seems a bit strange.
  • 2.4 - MDOT moved work on Allegan Street that was originally scheduled for 2005. - moved... ?
  • 2.5 - "What's happening is streets are artificially posted too low for the purpose of writing tickets," according to Jones. - bad sentence structure.

Should be a support after these issues are fixed. --Rschen7754 06:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Some copy edits have been made. Let me know if they address these comments. Imzadi 1979 → 14:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - issues resolved. --Rschen7754 17:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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