Talk:Sognsvann line/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Admrboltz (talk) 16:48, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Three deadlinks
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Beautiful images in the snow by the way :)
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
If you can fix the deadlinks I will pass the article.
Thank you for taking the time to do the review. I have fixed the two deadlinks I found, and used WP:WEBCITE on the one. I agree: trains are most beautiful either in snow or on a sunny, summer day. Arsenikk ^(talk) 17:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Such a pity that there are almost no photos of Sognsvann Line stations in the snow with a train (except from the one I just put in). Even I with my lousy photographing skills could be capable of shooting a nice photo of a wintery station (espescially since I use the line every day). ;) --Eisfbnore (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]