Talk:Stord Bridge

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Stord Bridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 13:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 13:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Initial comments

• Background -

• Is Foldrøyhomen used in the second paragraph the same (i.e. a typo) as Foldrøyholmen used in the first and third paragraphs?

• Fixed. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• The third paragraph is rather confusing for those of us who don't know the area well and it refers to places not on the map of the Triangle Link and the ferry services it replaced. The Hordaland Public Roads Administration in 1984 ........ preferred a pontoon bridge between Foldrøyholmen and Sørstokken, which I suspect is (possibly) the first proposal mentioned in the second paragraph - but anyway it's near the airport (not shown on the map, because its "off map"). It then states: In 1982, plans were launched for a fixed link to the mainland, which would include a bridge over Digernessundet, a causeway and low bridge across Spissøysundet and a low bridge over Gassasundet. In addition, a tunnel would have to be built from Føyno to Sveio, which is (I believe) the Triangle Link. However, the paragraph does not make it clear that this is not the same place as the preferred Foldrøyholmen - Sørstokken link: the Triangle Link is further south down the sund (or sundet).

• I added to fragments to make it somewhat easier to understand. Arsenikk ^(talk) 21:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. Yes, that helps. Pyrotec (talk) 16:14, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

• The fourth and sixth paragraphs mentions ferry services / ferries (pural) but the final paragraph mentions tolls on the ferry. The map seems to show three or four possible services (but they are not labelled as such): Siggjavag to Sagvag; Mosterhamn to Vallevag; Vallevag to Skjørsholmane; and Skjørsholmane to Ubtjoa (sorry I've missed off the accents on three of the -"bay"s). Are these interpretations of mine correct: three/four ferry routes and tolls on all three/four, or just the direct ferry route?

• This is discussed a bit more in the Triangle Link article, but I can add the names of the ferry services to make it more clear. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• Construction-

• Note, I changed the grammar in the final sentence of the first paragraph to: ...two catwalks were erected between them, with the constructors choosing two continuous catwalks instead of three separate pairs. Extra stability to the catwalks was achieved by building connections between the two.[22]. Can you check the Norsk original so ensure that my change reflects what was stated in the reference?

• Seems good. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• I don't really understand the technical description of the cable spinning in the second paragraph. I think it might be a problem of translation. This site shows cable spinning here, which might help.

• Thanks for the link. I have rephrased to make it a bit more understandable. Part of the problem was that I didn't understand much of the explanation in the text; that link was much more pedagogical. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• I'm not sure what little place is saying, is it about "room" or "speed", i.e. little place = "little space", or little pace = "slowly"?

• Rephrased to little space. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• I'm not sure about This involved installing a cable car and connecting two double loops each with a spinning wheel, with one loop spinning outward and the other spinning inward. The system has two reel racks, each with four reels, with two reels on one rack at any given time, allowing for minimum down-time when changing reels. . I assume that there were two cables, one on each side the road deck, but there could be six (but that might not be too important). I'm not sure what is being said above: one interpretation is that both cables were spun at the same time (with one cable car) starting at one end; so one wire is added to each cable on the way out and one wire to each cable on the way back. Can you clarify?

• I believe this has been addressed. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, it much better now. Pyrotec (talk) 19:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

• The final sentence of the final paragraph, states: the bridge allowed, along with the rest of the Triangle Link, four ferry services to terminate. These aught to be named in the article, there appear to be four ferry routes on the figure but they are not labelled as ferry routes neither does the figure name them (even if they were in the figure, that does not preclude the article naming them).

• Mentioned in the background section. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• Specifications -

• This section looks OK.

• WP:Lead -

• Looks OK.

At this point I'm putting the review On Hold, as there are just a few minor points that need to be fixed up before I can award GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 12:52, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. As always, you have been able to help create a better article. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

I'm happy to be able to award this article GA-status. Congratulations on bringing another Norwegian transport article up to GA. Pyrotec (talk) 19:28, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stord Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160203113929/http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/62357/binary/1086522?fast_title=Hordaland%2C+%C3%A5rs-+og+m%C3%A5nedsd%C3%B8gntrafikk.pdf to http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/62357/binary/1086522?fast_title=Hordaland%2C+%C3%A5rs-+og+m%C3%A5nedsd%C3%B8gntrafikk.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:16, 5 December 2017 (UTC)