Talk:Svalbard and Jan Mayen
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Chipmunkdavis in topic ISO codes
Svalbard and Jan Mayen has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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. | ||||||||||
|
This level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Need page
editpage is needed for the incoming redirect from ISO 3166-1:SJ
- I put a tribute to these places here after having visited them. if it's inapropriate feel free to discuss it on my talk page on http://www.wikitravel.org - The Snackmaster (Check out my excellent guides and give feedback) "Let's all grow together" - Who was it???
- Thanks for editing, but it's important that edits are sourced and neutral, and yours have an opinion and no sources. But please read WP:5P and keep editing! Snoutwood (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries
editOn the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section Location Maps for European countries had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the European continent, and for countries of the European Union exist in two versions. From November 16, 2006 till January 31, 2007, a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since January 1, 2007 all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of February 4, 2007 the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed soon at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish two things:
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 19 Feb2007 00:28 (UTC)
As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before February 5, 2007 a survey started that will be closed soon at February 20, 2007 23:59:59. It should establish two things:
- whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions),
- which new version (with of without indicating the entire European Union by a separate shade) should be applied for which countries.
There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote for one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 19 Feb2007 00:28 (UTC)
Top-level domain .sj
editPlease add something about .sj. Thanks. --91.138.4.97 11:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
- Since added. -- Beland (talk) 15:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Svalbard and Jan Mayen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 15:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: none found
Linkrot: one found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 15:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
edit- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- All references appear reliable and check out.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Thorough, broad and focussed.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- On image used, tagged and captioned
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Fine, I find no problems with this artcile. Happy to pass as GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- Thank you for taking the time to review the article :) Arsenikk (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
ISO codes
editThere’s seems to be an disproportionate focus on the ISO registrations in this article? Jo Jc Jo (talk) 10:10, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- It's the topic of the article. There's not much else to discuss about the two areas in conjunction with each other that doesn't also apply to other areas of Norway. CMD (talk) 15:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)