Talk:NSB El 9/GA1
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Starstriker7(Talk) 16:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I'll review this article in a bit. --Starstriker7(Talk) 16:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Criterion 1 (clear/concise prose; good spelling/grammar; compliance w/ MOS guides on lead, layout, W2W, fiction, and list incorporation)[edit]
Lead[edit]
- "NSB El 9 is a class of three electric locomotives built" - Wouldn't it make more sense to denote this class as retired as early as this first sentence?
- "1947 after a three-year delay caused by wartime sabotage." - Some mention of Norway's occupation by Nazi Germany should probably be included here.
History[edit]
- "Because of theAllied" - Insert a space.
- You should make it more clear that Norway had been invaded and occupied by the Nazis at this time to give some context.
- "and in part because the head engineer for the project disappeared during late 1944." - Can you find his name anywhere?
Specifications[edit]
- You switch between present and past tense quite a bit in the second paragraph. As there are still trains in existence, you should use present tense.
Criterion 2 (all info cited w/ inline citations, arranged in ref section; challengeable stuff cited by reliable sources; NOR)[edit]
Most of these articles are not in English and are offline. However, based on similar presently-GA articles, I think I can accept this in good faith.
Criterion 3 (covers all main aspects of topic; focused)[edit]
This one is fulfilled well, in my opinion.
Criterion 4 (no undue weight)[edit]
It looks neutral to me.
Criterion 5 (stable)[edit]
Edit history looks good!
[edit]
- I think the only real comment I have is a nitpicky grammar issue in the captions. I'd make them the same, either as full sentences or as fragments (like the first image's caption).
Overall comments[edit]
Whoa, you responded pretty quickly! You didn't even give me a chance to finish the review. :) In any case, congrats on building up this article! I just have that one last nitpick in the captions, and then I'll pass this at GAN. --Starstriker7(Talk) 20:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to review the article. I've fixed up the last thing. Arsenikk (talk) 20:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
- Nice work, Arsenikk. I'm passing the article now. :) --Starstriker7(Talk) 22:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)