Taconic State Parkway was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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 February 12, 2010 Peer review Reviewed February 19, 2018 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

U.S. Roads: New York Mid‑importance This article 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Locations  New York   This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it. This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists. This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.   National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. New York (state): Hudson Valley This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Hudson Valley (assessed as Mid-importance).

This review is transcluded from Talk:Taconic State Parkway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CycloneIsaac (talk · contribs) 04:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing later.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 04:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you AmericanAir88 (talk) 15:55, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Someone yesterday, put in a bunch of "Citation needed" tags. I am currently working on those. AmericanAir88 (talk) 15:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not. More than half of the route description is unreferenced, weasel words in the scenery section, there are two dead links, and 80% in the copy violation detector. This is very far away from passing as a Good Article. Failing until significant changes have been made.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 00:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CycloneIsaac: You did not even give me a chance to fix the issues. A smart GA reviewer would state the issues and give them time, but you impulsively failed due to self interest. You did not allocate any time. AmericanAir88 (talk) 02:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the reviewer feels that the issues can be fixed in a reasonable amount of time (the baseline suggestion is a week), then yes, I'd agree with you, AmericanAir88, that it should be put on hold for improvements. On the other hand, if the reviewer doesn't feel that that is possible, an immediate fail is a proper outcome. Just yesterday, I looked through the article and made some improvements to the various citations. There are four self-published sources that would need replacement before this could be promoted. Using improper or inappropriate sources is grounds for failure at GAN. Inadequate sourcing is also grounds for failure. I'd endorse the outcome of the review on those bases. Imzadi 1979 → 21:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]