# Talk:Jon Hol

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jon Hol/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA and have been doing some copy editing. The article is very interesting. However, I am concernted that it does not focus enough on the subject of the article. Rather, much of the article  describes a politicial process that, while fascinating, is not that related to the biography of the individual. Do you think you could refocus the article to concentrate on Jon Hol? Either that, or rename the article to be about the political process.  What do you think?  —Mattisse (Talk) 20:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

He is a quite obscure figure, so I am in no way able to find more biographic information about him. It's true that much of the article is context. I think it helps the reader, though. Won't condone a deletion of good data. Punkmorten (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I am not suggesting deleting data. How about renaming the article, so that it is about the political situation rather than a biography about an individual? Perhaps there are two different articles combined here, one on the political situation involving the King, and the other a biography about Jon Hol.   —Mattisse (Talk) 22:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes. This article is about Jon Hol, no doubt about that. As I see it, the descriptions of the political situation are not near enough for a separate article, it's tailored to fit Hol's biography, really. I fail to see how societal context is not "related to the biography of the individual". Punkmorten (talk) 22:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
OK. Could you make sure this article is linked to other relevant articles and is not an orphan? Also, someone pointed out to me that the link "Det norske arbeiderforbund" just redirects back to this article, but I could not find the link in the article. Also, that a significant part of the article is about Rifleringen for which there is no article and therefore no link in the article. Could you make at least a stub to link to it?   —Mattisse (Talk) 20:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Do you want an article on the pamphlet? I'll create a redirect. Punkmorten (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I thought there was a rule to avoid linking within an article to other places in the article. But I cannot find where that rule is, so perhaps it does not exist. If the importance of Rifleringen only pertains to Jon Hol, then probably there is no reason to create a separate article, unless other pages would link to it.  —Mattisse (Talk) 22:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): Well written   b (MoS): Follows MoS 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): Well referenced  b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): Broadly covers the issues  b (focused): Remains focused on issues pertinent to the article subject 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: NPOV 

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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Congratulations! An extremely interesting article.
—Mattisse (Talk) 22:51, 2 May 2009 (UTC)