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, 16 October 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

---

U.S. Route 23 in Michigan[edit]

U.S. Route 23 in Michigan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/U.S. Route 23 in Michigan/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): Imzadi 1979 → 02:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing in my series of work on the longest highways in the state of Michigan, I present #2 in the top 10. (I-75 which just passed is #1.) US 23 has origins in predecessor highways from the 1910s, and it is a major highway in the Lower Peninsula that was converted to freeways along its southern half in the 1950s. It's northern half is an especially scenic drive along the Lake Huron shoreline. The subject is worthy of consideration, and I believe the article meets the criteria for promotion. Imzadi 1979 → 02:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - I reviewed this article at GAN and ACR and feel it meets all the FA criteria. Dough4872 02:23, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • For reference, the ACR was here. --Rschen7754 07:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments - I supported at the ACR, but there were some changes to the article since April 2012. I anticipate supporting once this is fixed:
  • this extension was not approved by Congress on December 13, 1968. - a bit ambiguous
• I still have the same reservations that I did with my support on the ACR, but I don't believe that they are concerning enough to withhold support. --Rschen7754 07:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I updated that Congress approved a different allotment of Interstate mileage to Michigan. Otherwise, I can't see what's ambiguous about that passage. Imzadi 1979 → 14:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support meets the criteria. Issue was resolved. --Rschen7754 22:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Image check - all OK (CC, Flickr, PD-US-no notice). Sources and authors provided. GermanJoe (talk) 09:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• I didn't get the chance to review this at ACR, as this passed before I became active, so I'll leave a few comments:
  1. The first sentence of the second paragraph of the lead incorrectly states that the Indian trails were along US 23. US 23 didn't exist yet, so that should be reworded.
  2. "The highway has been a part of the Lake Huron Circle Tour since that program's creation in 1986." – What program? It's not mentioned by name, and "Lake Huron Circle Tour" isn't the name of the whole program, is it?

More to come later, I've only read through the route description thus far. TCN7JM 12:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I got those items fixed. Just let me know when you're through another section or two. Imzadi 1979 → 23:53, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, reading through to the end of the article, I have just one inquiry on whether or not it was intentional that Bay City is linked at its second usage in the history instead of its first. TCN7JM 14:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That was probably just an editing artifact from some revision along the way, and it's fixed now too. Imzadi 1979 → 22:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that being done, I feel this meets all FA criteria, so I can support this article's promotion to FA status. TCN7JM 22:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

• Compare FNs 4 and 5 - why include Google twice but MDOT only once?
• Compare FNs 10 and 55
• Why are Toledo Blade and The Blade being treated as different publications?
  • The answer to the above is that both papers changed their names several decades ago to strip out the city name from the publication name. It would be anachronistic to refer to a publication by a name it didn't use at the time of the publication. The names used are the names as listed in the masthead of the issues cited. Imzadi 1979 → 03:27, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Compare FNs 79 and 81 - why the different treatment of "editorial"?
• Be consistent in whether states are abbreviated or not. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nikkimaria: all other comments addressed. Imzadi 1979 →

• 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) 15:43, 13 October 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.