Talk:Haakon IV/GA1

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 10:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 10:43, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Initial comments
From a quick read of this article and the references, this article appears to be at or about GA level, possibly well on its way to being a WP:FAC. Nevertheless I'm just going to review it against WP:WIAGA. Pyrotec (talk) 20:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Historical sources & Background and childhood -
 * These two sections are compliant.

...Stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 20:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Reign -
 * This section appears to be fully compliant.


 * Views on Haakon's reign & Children and marriage -
 * These two sections are compliant.


 * WP:Lead -
 * This should both introduce the topic of the article and summarise the main points. It does both and is acceptable, although a bit more detail (or "meat") in the summary would help improve the the lead.

Pyrotec (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria An interesting an informative article
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * The Lead is acceptable as an introduction, but a bit more detailed summary of the main points would be beneficial. However, it's just about adequate to allow me to award GA-status as it is.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * Well illustrated.
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * Well illustrated.
 * 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:
 * Well illustrated.
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * Well illustrated.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I think this article could make WP:FAC although I suspect that the WP:Lead would need to be improved, i.e. a more detailed summary of the main points in the article, to get this article up to FA-standard.
 * Well illustrated.
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * Well illustrated.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I think this article could make WP:FAC although I suspect that the WP:Lead would need to be improved, i.e. a more detailed summary of the main points in the article, to get this article up to FA-standard.

I'm awarding this article GA-status. Its a good article and now A Good Article. Congratulations. Pyrotec (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)