Jump to content

Talk:Paul Huff Parkway/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Grk1011 (talk · contribs) 14:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bneu2013, I will be reviewing this for you! Grk1011 (talk) 14:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Would really benefit from a map
  • The infobox has a coordinates field, which would be really helpful for readers to find where this is (I've never heard of Cleveland, TN)
  • Are all of these names mentioned/referenced/sourced in the article?
    • Yes - "Paul Huff Parkway" and "Paul Huff" are the overwhelming common names for this road. The official name is almost never used, and only appears on signs posted along the parkway. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm asking for refs for this and mentions of the names somewhere in the article body. The full "C.S.M. Paul B. Huff Medal of Honor Memorial Parkway" likely has a good spot where you talk about the dedication. Grk1011 (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • First of all, Huff was still alive at the time of the route's naming and attended the dedication, and so the official name would have been different. The official name essentially is never used, and the only places I know of where it is outright written are on two signs (1, 2; a third one disappeared in 2015 or 2016, and was never replaced). Since the official name is so long, I really don't see a need of mentioning it elsewhere in the body. Other names like "Sgt. Paul Huff Parkway" or "Paul B. Huff Parkway" are also rarely, if ever used. Bneu2013 (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There shouldn't be a need for references 2 and 3 in the lead if this information is already present in the article body.
    • The information covered in citation 2 isn't explicitly mentioned in the body, although it is kind of obvious considering what is covered. Since this is the only place in the article that says the parkway is the top source of sales tax revenue, I'm going to go ahead and leave it. The information covered by citation 3 is repeated in the body, so I have removed it. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Per WP:LEAD, there shouldn't be standalone information here. I think it could fit in the second paragraph of "later history". Grk1011 (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Okay, I can probably work it in somewhere. The parkway has likely been the top source of sales tax revenue for more than 20 years however, and I wish I could find a source that explicitly says when this was. One of the sources from 2003 cited does mention that the Parkway already had more traffic lights than what used to be the main commercial street in Cleveland. Bneu2013 (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "while not a numbered highway" feels weird here because at this point, why would the reader expect it to be numbered? I think this relates to it being on the NHS, but without that context, this bit is irrelevant.
    • That, and the fact that it is one of the most heavily traveled roads in the area. Nearly all roads that are part of the NHS and carry traffic volumes as high as this are state-maintained, and as such, are numbered. I've also added a sentence to the lead clarifying that the road is maintained by the city. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Route description

[edit]

History

[edit]
  • "The road that is now" <- unneeded
  • I'm not sure the term "was let" should be used. Traffic engineering is my background and I've never encountered it myself.
    • This simply means a contract was awarded. I have used "was contracted" before, but some people don't like this because it sounds like someone is contracting a disease. I have gone ahead and reworded. Please let me know what you think. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'd recommend something like "began construction" or "for which a contract was awarded". "Contract" is a pretty well-known term and if you're concerned you could also wikilink it instead. Grk1011 (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        I've reworded all of the uses of "was let". Also, road construction projects usually begin a few weeks or months after the contract is awarded. I haven't been able to find a source for the exact dates that construction began; the paper didn't cover it. Bneu2013 (talk) 18:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The road was initially known as the Valley Head Connector Road." <- omit "the" if that was the official name unless this was a description?
    • I'm not sure if this was the official name per se, but it was probably posted on signs. It was definitely intended as a placeholder name, however. The sources refer to it as "the Valley Head Connector", "the Valley Head Connector Road", "the I-75 connector", etc. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think you're presenting it as the official name with this wording though, so just make sure you're not saying something not reflected in the sources or drawing any independent conclusions. Grk1011 (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        I wish I knew what exactly was posted on signs, but I don't. However, since all of the sources use the article "the", I think it is best that we use that terminology too. Presenting it as if this was ever a "serious" official name, i.e. "Paul Huff Parkway was originally called Valley Head Connector Road", I think would be borderline original research. Bneu2013 (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The accessible ref doesn't mention Connector. Does the other?
    • Yes. All of the Cleveland Daily Banner sources from the 1980s refer to it as such. Unfortunately, articles from this paper from before 1998 are not available online. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second mention of the full "Sgt. Paul B. Huff" feels repetitive. Just use Huff as you've already introduced
    •  Done
  • Mention that the mall is along the parkway for context
    •  Done - having "the parkway" in the same sentence twice seems kind of repetitive, so I've reworded the entire sentence. Please let me know what you think of the change. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do refs 33 and 34 back up congestion and crashes?
    • Ref 33 primarily serves to cite the information about increasing commercial developments, while 34 mentions congestion. I have added two additional sources that mention the increasing congestion and traffic hazards, as well as concerns about this. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • accident rate -> crash rate
    •  Done - although I don't see a problem with the former. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'll save the full traffic engineering profession explanation, but an accident is something different than a crash or collision. An "accident implies that nobody should be blamed", but in the case of roadway design, the blame is typically the design of the roadway, hence the need to make changes to it to remedy the situation. Grk1011 (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Ok, I see the term "accident" is falling out of favor with some people, even though I haven't personally noticed that. Maybe they haven't gotten the message where I'm from. Also, I'm not sure I agree that accident implies that no one is at fault, since accident usually means an unintended result, and most car crashes are unintended, but that's just my opinion. Bneu2013 (talk) 18:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "additional booms", a bit too colloquial
  • You mention nine projects, but only mention what appears to be three.
    • The source explicitly refers to nine projects. However, I think they are being conducted with fewer than nine contracts. For example, I'm pretty sure both I-75 ramp intersections are considered separate projects, yet it looks like both are being improved under the same contract. I know I've seen a source somewhere that has a map of all of the projects. I'll just have to pull it up. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update - Here is a map of the projects. Three of them are not even located on the parkway; just along the corridor. It looks like most of them are going to be intersection improvements, although only two of them (Peerless and Adkisson/Frontage) have received direct mention in any articles. Although I don't know for certain, I think it is likely that projects 1 and 2 will be combined under a single contract, as they also include improvements to the section between these two intersections. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention in what document(?), format(?) the "need" was listed.
    Update - I've added a new source that clarifies this in more detail. Apparently, the project was included in a "wish list" sent to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which was then presumably sent to federal officials. Then President-elect Barack Obama appears to have requested that the U.S. Conference of Mayors prepare these lists as planning for his then-proposed stimulus package. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Major intersections

[edit]
  • ok

See also

[edit]
  • ok

References and images

[edit]
  • Spot checks (not included above):
    • Ref 1: Pretty annoying that it doesn't hold the exact location and that it's in several line segments, but the information is there.
    • Ref 11: I couldn't find mention of Stuart Rd, is that part not in the preview?
      • No. The road was originally called "Industrial Park Road" (see this map), but was renamed at some point after a prominent family who owned part of the land that the road was built on. The relevant text in the source is "BRADLEY - Construction of industrial access road from Tenn 2. north of Cleveland to Old Tasso Road". State Route 2 is a hidden component designation for this section of US 11. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Offline and subscription sources accepted in good faith. Appear to be reputable based on title and publisher.
    • Would recommend including some quotes from the offline and subscription sources when the information is subjective, for example "many residents", "activist", "very laborious", "boom".
  • Earwig's tool showed 0%, which is pretty impressive, but also makes a bit of sense given the number of offline sources.
  • both images are properly licensed.

Discussion

[edit]

I'm having some trouble with archive links, so will check later on a different computer. Grk1011 (talk) 17:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grk1011: - I've responded to all of your comments so far. Still waiting on my map request to be answered. Bneu2013 (talk) 07:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still have to check the archive links. Haven't been able to get to the other computer yet. Grk1011 (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grk1011: - I have responded to and addressed some of your additional comments. Unfortunately, my internet connection has unexpectedly worsened over the last 24 hours or so, and as such, my activity on Wikipedia has been somewhat limited. Hopefully this will be fixed the next day or two. In the meantime, please review the additional changes I have made. Bneu2013 (talk) 18:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grk1011: - update - I think I have pretty well addressed all of your comments. I've made a few other spots changes, and so you might want to glance over the article again. Bneu2013 (talk) 16:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! @Bneu2013: Remaining comments now that I can check the archives:

  • Ref 29: Good for Vets day naming
  • Ref 32: I don't think this ref backs up anything about a boom in commercial development. It's more about the health of the mall, and is an article that seeks to dispel concerns that the mall is suffering.
    • This source is primarily for the purpose of citing the opening date of the mall. Other sources corroborate the commercial development that took place between the late 1990s and mid-2000s. Bneu2013 (talk) 23:04, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The name of the parkway needs to be included in a reference, "C.S.M. Paul B. Huff Medal of Honor Memorial Parkway, more commonly known as Paul Huff Parkway or simply Paul Huff". I can imagine there being a dedication sign somewhere with the full name or that locals might say "take the Paul Huff to xyz". You'll need to prove that. I'm honestly fine with a google maps ref of the sign in the dedication section to source the former.
    •  Done - Street View reference for the official name. If you are asking for a citation that outright says "Paul Huff Parkway" or "Paul Huff" are the common names, well this is pretty much WP:BLUE for anyone who is from the area. All of the street signs, including the ones on I-75, say "Paul Huff Parkway" (northbound, southbound), and all businesses located on the road use "Paul Huff Parkway" in their addresses. For example, here is the website for the Bradley Square Mall. If someone were to request that the article be moved to a different title, it would most likely fail per WP:COMMONNAME. Nearly all of the sources from the 1990s to the present also refer to it as "Paul Huff Parkway" or "Paul Huff". Bneu2013 (talk) 01:28, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the lead, you sort of repeat that it's a busy road in both paragraphs. "has come to be one of the most heavily traveled and widely used roads in the city" and "one of the highest volumes on any road in the area"
    •  Fixed - reworded to say that it is a main road, not one of the busiest (even though that might be kind of obvious from this). I think this is fine, since the second paragraph implies that it wasn't always one of the busiest roads in the area. Bneu2013 (talk) 22:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The road was initially known as the Valley Head Connector Road": you mentioned this potentially not being official, can you add some context about this? Parts of, or whatever the sources say. It's presented as an official name, but unclear if that was actually the case.
    • I've reworded "known" to "referred to". You can look at the quotes I've provided in the offline source, and it should be clear that this was definitely a placeholder name. Although I don't know the specifics, the way it works with road names in Tennessee (and probably most states) is that if a road is named for a person, this must be approved by the appropriate governing body, upon approval from the person and/or their family members or friends. Other than that, it is usually up to the appropriate road department to choose the names of roads. In the case of this road, it was initially referred to as the Valley Head Connector or Valley Head Connector Road, although I unfortunately do not know exactly what the signs said. I will also point out that part of Valley Head Road still exists and retains this name. The part between Adkisson Drive/Frontage Road and about 500 feet (150 m) west of Peerless Road reused the remainder of Valley Head Road; the dead end stub of Valley Head Road west of Peerless Road used to continue west onto what is now Paul Huff Parkway. Peerless Road also originally ended at the intersection with Valley Head Road, but was extended about 250 feet (76 m) north to end at Paul Huff Parkway when it was built. Bneu2013 (talk) 01:28, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • First sentence of "Later history" leads the reader to believe that the mall caused the development, which may be partially true, but that's not what the sources say. Suggest "By 1991, the Bradley Square Mall had opened along the parkway and much commercial development took place from the late 1990s to the mid 2000s"
    •  Done
  • I think a lot of the interesting tidbits are sourced from the offline refs, so work on those quotes in the refs, especially if you seek potential WP:DYK. Grk1011 (talk) 15:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grk1011: - I've been busy the last few days, but I'll try to get to these later today. Bneu2013 (talk) 15:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grk1011: - It took longer than I had planned, but I've addressed all of your remaining comments. Bneu2013 (talk) 01:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bneu2013: Thank you! You definitely went above and beyond with the offline quotes. The article is in great shape. Happy to pass it now! Grk1011 (talk) 12:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Paul_Huff_Parkway/GA1&oldid=1213502733"