Talk:Air Norway/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Airplaneman   ✈  21:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * The prose is decent, and I made some minor fixes.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * All good here; references are present where they are needed. Checklinks is clear.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Great.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This is definitely a Good Article. I cannot dispute the fact that the article is broad as well as focused in its coverage. The subject is represented free of bias and illustrated with pictures that are with the appropriate tags. Referencing is good as well. For further improvement, consider adding more content; the prose can always do with some improvement. See Biman Bangladesh Airlines for an airline Featured Article example. Congrats, Airplaneman   ✈  03:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * This is definitely a Good Article. I cannot dispute the fact that the article is broad as well as focused in its coverage. The subject is represented free of bias and illustrated with pictures that are with the appropriate tags. Referencing is good as well. For further improvement, consider adding more content; the prose can always do with some improvement. See Biman Bangladesh Airlines for an airline Featured Article example. Congrats, Airplaneman   ✈  03:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)