Talk:German U-boat bases in occupied Norway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article German U-boat bases in occupied Norway has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
May 16, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:German U-boat bases in occupied Norway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ~NerdyScienceDude () 04:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    See below.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    The lead section is entirely unreferenced.
    Per WP:lead, I'm allowed to have it unrefrenced as the lead just summarises what is in the whole article.--White Shadows you're breaking up 14:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    No issues here.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    No POV found.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    No disputes currently going on.
  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):
    Images look great.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    It's close, but no cigar. It needs some more references. It looks great otherwise. On hold for one week. ~NerdyScienceDude () 04:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Per my knowladge, the editor can choose whether or not the lead should have refs. I would like to see it a bit longer, meaning the lead. Buggie111 (talk) 13:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
I've expanded the lead to 3 paraghraps and I'v addressed the issue of no refs in the lead per the MOS rules in WP:LEAD. Hope that's the last issue :)--White Shadows you're breaking up 14:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
First and fourth "mini" paragraph for Bergen need a ref. Buggie111 (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
All done.--White Shadows you're breaking up 19:30, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Not all done. I found a few more issues:
  • Initial planing for many U-boat bunkers began in late 1940 and starting in 1941, the Organisation Todt began the construction of bunkers in Bergen and Trondheim. The initial U-boat bunkers were completed between 1942 and 1943.
    • planing → planning
  • The Norwegians however put up a stiffer resistance to the invading German forces. Nonetheless, by May 1940 the southern half of Norway was under German control.
    • However needs to be removed since it's a word to avoid.
  • Following the German invasion of France and the Low Countries, the Allies were forced to evacuated the Norwegian port of Narvik, leaving the country to the Germans who would occupy it until the end of the war.
    • evacuated → evacuate
I will pass once these issues are resolved. ~NerdyScienceDude () 23:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
All done. Buggie111 (talk) 23:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Buggie. While that probably does not deserve co-nom credit, I'll give you a barnstar once NSD passes it.--White Shadows you're breaking up 23:30, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The first bullet point is still there and Buggie decided to do the opposite of that bullet point in a different section. ~NerdyScienceDude () 00:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

My bad. Buggie111 (talk) 00:17, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Done.--White Shadows you're breaking up 00:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your work. Pass. ~NerdyScienceDude () 14:06, 16 May 2010 (UTC)