Talk:CC Amfi/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Resolute (talk · contribs) 02:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

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):

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:

   Pass/Fail:

General

• Images are good
  • Though it is not required for GA status, Alternative text for the images is preferred
• Sources look good
  • No concern with close paraphrasing, given nearly all links are in Norwegian

Lead

• "Other mayor events held at..." - Typo? I presume that is supposed to be "major"?

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• As a general complaint, I've never really cared for listing one-off events as being tenants in the infobox. I won't suggest removal, just sharing a personal opinion.

Construction

• Link Storhamar IL on first use

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• "...but a research project coordinated by the Norwegian Institute of Technology make it possible to build the venue in wood." - Awkward statement. I assume that should just be "made it possible". It also makes me curious. Is the arena completely made of wood? If so, is that unusual in Norway?

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Facilities

• "...Unlike Lillehammer and Gjøvik, Hamar only uses the interest and not of the capital of their funds..." - Also a bit awkward. Perhaps just strike "of"? "Hamar uses only the interest, not the capital, of their funds [to cover any deficit]"?

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• "...75 meters (246 ft) wise ..." - Typo. Should be "wide"

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• "The venue has an official ice hockey spectator capacity for 6,091 spectators," - No need to say "spectators" twice. I would just remove the first use: "The venue has an official ice hockey capacity for 6,091 spectators"

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• "During the 1994 Winter Olympics, Hamar Olympic Amphitheatre was used for figure skating and short track speed skating. It hosted 13 events, drawing an average of 5,554 spectators.[27] During the Olympics, Storhamar Ishall was used for warming up and training." - Second use of "During the Olympics" is redundant.

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Events

• I am not sure that the Nancy Kerrigan/Tonya Harding incident is particularly relevant to this article

Maybe not the most relevant fact, but it's only half a sentence. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• In the Ice hockey section, your uses of "Dragon's" should either be Dragons if speaking of the team in general, or Dragons' if referring to something the team possesses. i.e.: The Dragons' highest average... and The Dragons have played....

Y. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Overall

A well written article overall. There are a few typos and a couple places where the wording is awkward, but you have touched on everything I would expect to see in an article about such a facility. I am placing this nomination on hold to give time to address the minor issues above. Regards, Resolute 02:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review. I am traveling in the Middle East as we speak (or should that be "write") and have very little time and access to the Internet. I will be back at home on 5 April and with your consent would be more than happy to take a thorough look at the comments and amend them at that time. I fear that at this time I do not have the time to do a thorough enough read-through to fix the issues, even if they are not the largest. Arsenikk ^(talk) 07:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I tried to fix the issues. Geschichte (talk) 13:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I am now passing the article. Congrats to you both! Resolute 17:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC)