Talk:Storo station/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Well done. I was unable to find any major problems that I couldn't fix myself. I suppose "appartments" is an alternative spelling (one I have never seen before, I had to look it up) so I had to stop myself before "correcting" it. If I changed anything I shouldn't have, feel free to put it back the way it was. Only one issue is keeping me from passing the article.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   • References The link for ref number 15 is broken.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Article on hold until the issue can be addressed.. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 04:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC) Article passed. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 14:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

   Thank you for the review. They have published new schedules and maps since the nomination, so I linked to the new material. Arsenikk ^(talk) 10:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)