Talk:Sotra Bridge/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
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
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- 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.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Thorough, without unneccessary detail.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- 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)
- Pass/Fail: