# Talk:Ålgård Line

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ålgård Line/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: two disambiguations fixed.diff
Linkrot: no dead links found.


### Checking against GA criteria
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
The prose is "reasonably well written", I made a small number of copy-edits.diff Complies sufficiently with the MoS
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
Online sources check out, I assume good faith for print sources.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Thorough, whilst remaining focussed on the subject.
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): 
Correctly tagged and captioned.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
I have no hesitation in passing this as a good article. Congratulations! –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:24, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review the articles. Your feedback is continuing to make me an ever better Wikipedian. Arsenikk (talk) 20:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Could you provide a map?  Dr. Blofeld      White cat  17:53, 8 May 2010 (UTC)