Talk:NSB El 9/GA1

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

Reviewer: Starstriker7(Talk) 16:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll review this article in a bit. --Starstriker7(Talk) 16:41, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Lead

 * "NSB El 9 is a class of three electric locomotives built" - Wouldn't it make more sense to denote this class as retired as early as this first sentence?
 * Excellent idea. Arsenikk (talk)  19:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "1947 after a three-year delay caused by wartime sabotage." - Some mention of Norway's occupation by Nazi Germany should probably be included here.
 * Done. Arsenikk (talk)  19:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

History

 * "Because of theAllied" - Insert a space.
 * Fixed. Arsenikk (talk)  19:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You should make it more clear that Norway had been invaded and occupied by the Nazis at this time to give some context.
 * Added some more juice. Arsenikk (talk)  19:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * "and in part because the head engineer for the project disappeared during late 1944." - Can you find his name anywhere?
 * It was not mentioned in the source, and I doubt there is any other conceivable way of finding it out. Arsenikk (talk)  19:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Specifications

 * You switch between present and past tense quite a bit in the second paragraph. As there are still trains in existence, you should use present tense.
 * Fixed. Arsenikk (talk)  19:32, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Criterion 2 (all info cited w/ inline citations, arranged in ref section; challengeable stuff cited by reliable sources; NOR)
Most of these articles are not in English and are offline. However, based on similar presently-GA articles, I think I can accept this in good faith.

Criterion 3 (covers all main aspects of topic; focused)
This one is fulfilled well, in my opinion.

Criterion 4 (no undue weight)
It looks neutral to me.

Criterion 5 (stable)
Edit history looks good!

Criterion 6 (images tagged w/ copyright status; fair use images have rationale; images/captions relevant)

 * I think the only real comment I have is a nitpicky grammar issue in the captions. I'd make them the same, either as full sentences or as fragments (like the first image's caption).
 * Yes, I see what you mean. I made both of them sentences and added a period. Good spot. Arsenikk (talk)  20:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Overall comments
Whoa, you responded pretty quickly! You didn't even give me a chance to finish the review. :) In any case, congrats on building up this article! I just have that one last nitpick in the captions, and then I'll pass this at GAN. --Starstriker7(Talk) 20:53, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to review the article. I've fixed up the last thing. Arsenikk (talk)  20:59, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice work, Arsenikk. I'm passing the article now. :) --Starstriker7(Talk) 22:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)