Talk:Gjøvik Olympic Cavern Hall/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mitch32^{(20 Years of Life: Wikipedia 5:33)} 23:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

My main issues are as outlined. They aren't anything crazy, but I think they are simple to address:

This is usually discretionary, but May I suggest renaming References and notes, promoting the level 3 header to Level 2 and renaming it to References.
The lack of photography is rather displeasing, not a requirement, but also the article looks very dry indeed without them.
Try delinking or bluelinking the link in the first citation. The red wiki-links in the article citations usually isn't the most pleasing thing in the world.

However, I will pass the article, thanks for nominating and providing me my first GAN review in 1.75 years. Good job!Mitch32^{(20 Years of Life: Wikipedia 5:33)} 23:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the "express service" (must be the fastest nomination to review time I have experienced) and I'm glad you've come back to do some reviewing. I've made a short stub for the red link in the reference, the other two red links in the article are on my list to do soon (but they will require a bit more work). I would love to have some indoor pictures, but I haven't found any, so this is as good as it'll get for the time being. Arsenikk ^(talk) 09:09, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]