Talk:NSB El 9/GA1
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Starstriker7 in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
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)
Criterion 1 (clear/concise prose; good spelling/grammar; compliance w/ MOS guides on lead, layout, W2W, fiction, and list incorporation) edit
Lead edit
- "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?
- "1947 after a three-year delay caused by wartime sabotage." - Some mention of Norway's occupation by Nazi Germany should probably be included here.
History edit
- "Because of theAllied" - Insert a space.
- You should make it more clear that Norway had been invaded and occupied by the Nazis at this time to give some context.
- "and in part because the head engineer for the project disappeared during late 1944." - Can you find his name anywhere?
Specifications edit
- 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.
Criterion 2 (all info cited w/ inline citations, arranged in ref section; challengeable stuff cited by reliable sources; NOR) edit
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) edit
This one is fulfilled well, in my opinion.
Criterion 4 (no undue weight) edit
It looks neutral to me.
Criterion 5 (stable) edit
Edit history looks good!
edit
- 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).
Overall comments edit
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)