Talk:NSB Class 66/GA1

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

Hello! I guess I'll review this one too :) Comments up in a bit... Dana boomer (talk) 18:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 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:
 * Everything looks good with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Very nice work! Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Everything looks good with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Very nice work! Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything looks good with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Very nice work! Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)