Talk:Nord Stage

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nord Stage/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 09:19, 18 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a(prose):  b(MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  

   " of Stockholm, Sweden. " perhaps "in ..."?

     Done Changed to Stockholm in Sweden and wikilinked --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

   Footnotes should be placed behind commas in "Reception" :)

     Done Have done a few of these MOS fixes recently, and of course the last thing I did before the GA review would not have them. Anyway, fixed. :-) --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a(references):  b(citations to reliable sources):  c(OR):  

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects):  b(focused):  

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:  

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:  

6. 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):  

7. Overall: Aye. Good work! :) Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 17:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

   Pass/Fail: