Talk:Svalbard Rocket Range/GA1

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

Reviewer: Noleander (talk · contribs) 15:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I can do this review, if nominator is still interested. --Noleander (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments from Noleander
End Noleander comments. --Noleander (talk) 15:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wording: "which is again owned by .." -> " which is owned by"
 * Fixed. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Map would be great: Since it is the most northern of all launch sites, a small map would be really helpful for readers to get a feel for where it is in the world.
 * I spent quite some time trying to add a map, just to discover it was showing the wrong location. It is beyond my technical abilities to fix the issue, but anyone else is free to have a shot at it. For the record, the code I attempted was  The corresponding coordinates turn out on-spot in Google Earth. Arsenikk  (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wording: "The first proper launch consisted was a Norwegian rocket, ..." -> remove "consisted"
 * Fixed. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Link error? - "by two Black Brant rockets f ... " - link to Black Brant is to a bird article.
 * Fixed. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Spelling: "SvalRak originally hed permission .." -> "hed" could be "had" or "held", either one is okay
 * Fixed. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Details?: "The site was upgraded in 2008. .." - any specifics on the upgrade? larger? handles bigger rockets?
 * An extensive search on the Internet and various news sources has not found any other information about the site. It received a media boom when it opened and since the there has been little. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Links needed: "and the polar cups, cleft and cup." -> Need links for these terms.  "cup" and "cleft" may not be the right words
 * I spent some time digging into this, and none of the terms have articles on Wikipedia. I'm hardly even a lay-man at this topic, but these are the terms used in the sources, which are written by scientists. If you are any the more knowledgeable about the issue, please help me out. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Clarify: " It is also used for studying the Magnetopause and aurora borealis, for which Ny-Ålesund is the only area in the world where this can be studied with ease of access." - I assume that means that it is the most convenient location for studying them because it is the most northerly facility?  The word "only" is confusing ... lots of places could be used, but this one place is special because ...?
 * Clarified. Arsenikk (talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Pic caption: The picture at top of article is great.  But its caption should directly name the article's topic.  Example: "The Svalbard Rocket Range is used by agencies such as NASA to launch sounding rockets".   The Wallops FF is not very important, and mentioning it prominently in that caption could confuse readers.
 * Sure. <strong style="color:green;">Arsenikk <sup style="color:grey;">(talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Clarify: "SvalRak originally hed permission to fire four rockets every four years." - the word "originally" implies that the number was changed.  If it is still 4, change to "SR has permission to .." .  If it was 4, then changed, say that.
 * The reason I state this is that the one source states that they had this permit and the other source states they have fired 41 rockets, which would be a violation of this. <strong style="color:green;">Arsenikk <sup style="color:grey;">(talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That is all. If the above issues are addressed, the article will be GA status.
 * Thank you for the review; all has been seen to. <strong style="color:green;">Arsenikk <sup style="color:grey;">(talk)  20:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)