Talk:Ringerike Line/GA1

GA Review

I will be reviewing this article. Canadakid2 (talk) 00:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Review by User:Lpangelrob

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   "made presidency over distance reductions." - probably not what the intended meaning was. "Took precedence", perhaps? Why is "more" italicized? A minor spacing issue in the final paragraph.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   The first two paragraphs in History are uncited; I'm assuming they're related to current ref [12].

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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):

   The image in the infobox needs a caption in English - I don't know what it's saying otherwise.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Very good summary of the subject, just needs a nip and tuck here and there. —Rob (talk) 22:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank your for the review. All matters should have been seen to now. Arsenikk ^(talk) 00:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I made a couple further edits, but now it looks good. Thanks! —Rob (talk) 03:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)