Talk:Construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System/GA1

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

First feedback: The lead is too short. Make it summarize this article. You might just be able to use the construction section from the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System article as a base and work from there.

Referencing and images look fine so far. No obvious issues with the prose. Will give a full review once the lead is expanded. Jclemens (talk) 03:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Good job.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Thanks for fixing up the lead, looks great now.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Excellent referencing
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * This really is better as a breakout article than as a humongous section of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System article.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Good
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * People have come here to help, but nothing is disputed. Pretty tranquil topic, really.
 * 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):
 * Great selection of images, in both variety and placement, although I did move one image.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Good job. Your hard work to peel this out and into its own article is appropriately rewarded with promotion to GA status Jclemens (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2009 (UTC)