Talk:Gardermoen Line/GA1

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

Hi! I'm doing the review at this moment...it shouldn't take long, as I've already read it! (it's very interesting!) Anyway, I'll get back to you soon! Cheers, &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 17:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:


 * Any way to expand the lead to cover the controversy that occurred during the building of the railway?
 * Do you like my change to the lead? (I don't really know if I like it myself...)
 * This article needs a copy-editing to get rid of the dirt underneath its fingernails...could you ask a member of Guild of Copy-Editors to help?
 * Ref #7, de-link the author please! (He has no article here....)
 * Is there any way to find sources that are in English....? (Not too many people on this side of the pond speak Norwegian or Swedish...)

Anyway, there are a few issues that need to be addressed, so I'll put this on hold for a while...if you need any help, feel free to ask! Cheers, &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 17:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review and feedback. I will address the concerns at first opportunity. The change of flow in the lead is good, but I think some of the words are a bit excessive in complexity (in particular geriatric). Ref #7 is a newspaper (not a person) and I will try to make a stub article on it (it definitively deserves one). As for sources, I can look again, but most of the sources are either English or bilingual, and only details that would not reach the international press or international publications are in Norwegian, so I do not think it will be possible to substitute them. If you want them verified, I can get another Norwegian speaker to look at it. Arsenikk (talk)  19:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I gave it a try =)
 * Alright, (some guideline somewhere in the caverns of MoS) says that redlinks are allowed if someone is planning to create them, so ok.
 * Sorry for giving you this impression, but it's not that I don't believe you! I just wanted to know if it was possible. Apparently it's not, so no problem here. :) I'll keep it on hold until you get rid of my dumb edits to the lead ;D and then it will pass easily. Cheers! &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 20:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I gave the article a copyedit and found two dozen grammar errors, so it may be good enough now, but I can send it on the the league if you still want to (we both want a well written article, but I cannot see my own errors). I swapped an image, and I believe the latter one (of Oslo S) is "attributed in a reasonable manner" by means of attribution if the image is clicked on. As for the paragraph refs, that is a correct assumption (one I believe is in line with WP:CITE). I will now create the Hamar Dagblad stub and the route map. Thanks again for the review, and please comment if there is something I have overseen now. Arsenikk (talk)  20:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It's good/close enough (and it's the Guild now)... =) I saw these, however:
 * "The line is owned by the Norwegian National Rail Administration." Which line? ...or both?
 * "The principle of the airport construction..." What does this mean?
 * Yes, it is in line with CITE, but I always check to make sure. xD
 * Looking good; almost there. &mdash; the _ ed  17  &mdash; 21:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Those concerns have been addressed now. Arsenikk (talk)  09:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey. I'm on Wikibreak until tommorow...only reason why I am on is my mom, but she wants me off and I have to do homework. =/ Plus, I have a RL issue...freakin' girlfriends... I'll take a look at this as soon as I can. Cheers, &mdash; Ed 17   for President    Vote for Ed  21:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, it looks good. Passing now, so congrats. :) Cheers! &mdash; Ed 17   for President    Vote for Ed  23:26, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review, and especially with helping the article become a lot better. Your copyedits and feedback are much appreciated. Arsenikk (talk)  18:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * You are welcome. Cheers, &mdash; Ed 17   for President   Vote for Ed  18:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)