Talk:Mississippi Highway 844

Mississippi Highway 844 was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 3, 2015	Good article nominee	Listed
January 27, 2015	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

United States: Mississippi

	United States portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
	Mississippi portal This redirect is supported by WikiProject Mississippi (assessed as Low-importance).

U.S. Roads: Mississippi

	U.S. roads portal This redirect 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
Locations	Mississippi

Disputed

I'm disputing two things:

The route was state maintained in the 1960s. Blue is simply labeled as "other highways" on the MDOT maps, and does not have any bearing on maintenance.
The route didn't exist until 1998. Just because a route is not shown on the official state map does not mean it does not exist.

--NE2 23:47, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a pretty poor article for GA and should probably be reassessed. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:15, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Issue number 2 could be fixed by changing it to "by 1998"... but as I'm going to say on the GAR I am not certain that this article is of good quality. --Rs chen 7754 02:13, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]