Talk:Svalbard/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jhbuk (talk) 19:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
~~"Transport": "Arktikugol" should be explained or linked.~~
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Well referenced.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
There isn't really any information about education (University Centre in Svalbard only gets one sentence), or things like sports and culture, but I assume that would be pretty much exclusive to Longyearbyen? Maybe also add an average length of time spent there for each visitor - what % come on cruises for instance? The sections are excellent summaries of the main articles.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
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):
Plenty of very useful images.
Overall:
Pass:
Excellent (sorry the review's a little sort again) Jhbuk (talk) 19:57, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. There is so much to say about Svalbard and so little space, so deciding what to say is a bit difficult. But I think you're right: there should be more about the communities, both Longyearbyen and Barentsburg, and perhaps some more about tourism, although I haven't come across the particular statistics you suggest. I'll look into it. Arktikugol is explained in the "economy" section, but I can add a little note in the transport section too. There should come improved articles for the various settlements in the near future, and much more will be said there. Arsenikk ^(talk) 20:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]