# Talk:Sotra Bridge

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sotra Bridge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 23:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: one found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 23:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)


### Checking against GA criteria
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
I made a number of copy-edits.[2] I feel that more could be done, especially if you plan to take this article further. However, I feel it now meets the standards.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
I assume good faith for sources, which my lack of knowledge of Norwegian means I cannot examine thoroughly. I believe that the sources are reliable and I find on evidence of original research. The article is adequately referenced.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Thorough, without unneccessary detail.
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): 
Images check out
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
OK, this article meets the standards for listing sufficiently and so I am happy to list it. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review the article and for the copyedit :) Arsenikk (talk) 07:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Can someone who knows the subject please sort out the above reference?  Its been a referencing error for over 10 years now! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:54, 5 June 2023 (UTC)