Talk:Sotra Bridge/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 23:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: one found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 23:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I made a number of copy-edits.[2] I feel that more could be done, especially if you plan to take this article further. However, I feel it now meets the standards.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   I assume good faith for sources, which my lack of knowledge of Norwegian means I cannot examine thoroughly. I believe that the sources are reliable and I find on evidence of original research. The article is adequately referenced.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Thorough, without unneccessary detail.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images check out

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, this article meets the standards for listing sufficiently and so I am happy to list it. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

   Thank you for taking the time to review the article and for the copyedit :) Arsenikk ^(talk) 07:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)