Talk:MV Geysir/GA1

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Arsenikk in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk) 12:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Comments
  • Avoid entity suffixes (such as LLC) when referring to company (with exceptions of when differentiating a company from its product, such as Google and Google, Inc.) Similar with Noro (should be at least piped).
  Question: There is a potential ambiguity between two separate business entities: TransAtlantic Lines LLC and TransAtlantic Lines Iceland. I'm open to changing it, but it was there for a reason. HausTalk 12:30, 8 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Okay, either way is fine then. Arsenikk (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • All values need conversion to imperial units (easy with {{convert}}). This includes the infobox.
 Y Done.
  • ' Madisonville, Louisiana' should be linked.
 Y Done.
  • DWT should be spelled out.
 Y Done.
  • Please avoid external links in the body. Either have them as references or external links at the end.
 Y Moved external link inside citation.
  • There has been a recent change to the MOS, so instead of writing "NOK 6,000,000", it should now be "6,000,000 Norwegian krone (NOK)"... and then use NOK for later appearances.
 Y Done. Since NOK is not used elsewhere in the article, I omitted the (NOK) part. HausTalk 12:33, 8 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
 Y Done.
  • Link "Norwegian Ship Register" (and fix the naming). The links (in the references) are named "Register", not "Registry" (and they both have articles).
 Y Done.
 Y Changed in cites.
  • That being said, I don't seem to get any useful information out of those references, all I get is a generic search field.
It looks like it is impossible to link directly to the individual pages. Instead, I've appended instructions in the references section on how to fill out the search form to pull up the three records of interest.
  • The second external link is dead.
 Y Fixed.

Placing article on hold. Arsenikk (talk) 12:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for reviewing, Arsenikk. I think I've addressed your concerns. Cheers. HausTalk 11:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply
Congratulations with a good article Arsenikk (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply