Talk:Lillehammer Olympiapark

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLillehammer Olympiapark has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 16, 2013Good article nomineeListed

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Lillehammer Olympiapark/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 20:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenikk's been gone a while, but if you ping me when you review this I'll address the concerns best I can. Wizardman 00:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wizardman. Sorry, I've been away as well and I see that you have closed another "hanging" review of mine. I'll make a start on this one tonight. I don't usually have any major problems with Arsenikk's nominations, and I'd not noticed that he was gone (but then again I've not looked). Thanks for the offer to address the concerns and for cleaning up the other review. Pyrotec (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments[edit]

I've now done a quick initial read of this article from start-to-finish, and I've done a few minor tweakes to the grammar (and added a wikilink) on the way, but I've not checked any references or citations. On this basis, the nomination is clearly not a "quick fail" and it appears to be at or about GA-level.

I'm now going to review the article in more depth, starting at the History and finishing with the WP:Lead. This will take another day or so. Pyrotec (talk) 21:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • History -
  • Looks OK.
  • Operations -
  • Looks OK.
  • Venues & Lead -
  • These two sections look OK.

Overall summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

An informative, well referenced and well illustrated article.

  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. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to 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 if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on getting this article up to the necessary standard. Pyrotec (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Lillehammer Olympiapark. 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:

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) 14:52, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Lillehammer Olympiapark. 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:

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) 07:55, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lillehammer_Olympiapark&oldid=1204914405"