Talk:Alby, Öland

Alby, Öland was one of the Geography and places 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
October 18, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
September 16, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 10, 2024.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Alby, Sweden (pictured) is a mesolithic settlement, the earliest known of any humans on the island of Öland?

Current status: Delisted good article

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norse history and culture High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. 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.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Sections

Suggestion: Split up "Geology and history" into separate sections. Then have times as subsections. - Francis Tyers · 16:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Footnotes go after periods, not before. Rlevse 23:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA on hold

This article will be put on hold (for 7 days) until these minor adjustments can be made :

1. Well written? Fail

2. Factually accurate? Pass

3. Broad in coverage? Fail

4. Neutral point of view? Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images? Pass

Additional comments :

Make sure that all the inline citations appear after the punctuation.
The lead section introduces material that isn't talked about in the rest of the article.
Many elements are still not presented in the article : demography, geographical situation (not only in the lead), when were the excavations done, and many other facets of life there.

Lincher 00:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing to respond to above comments

All of the comments seem appropriate and i have endeavoured to respond to each comment. In particular, i have:

Split Geology and Ancient history into two separate sections
Expanded Geology material by factor of two
Expanded Early history by factor of two
Revised footnote format to appear after periods
Added a new section on demography and current aspect to discuss demography and land use
Added material as needed in the text to insure that intro material is further discussed in the body
Added some additional links and done some copy editing to improve writing quality

Please remark upon how well these edits fulfill the needs for GA status. thank you. Anlace 03:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like those modifications. I think it now needs to have more inline citations to give credit to the additions (since they were done recently, it will be easy) and it will also help the verifiability. Lincher 20:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added four new in line citations including two entirely new reference sources to support the new material. Thanks for that comment. I think the article is much improved. let me know if anything further is needed. Regards. Anlace 21:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA passed

Work has been done in order to include material upon the above comments. It now is a good article. Lincher 12:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA delisted

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. Unfortunately, as of September 16, 2007, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAC. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GA/R.

Every statement that is likely to be challenged needs an inline citation.

Epbr123 19:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]