Talk:1994 Progress Party national convention
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| 1994 Progress Party national convention has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 15, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that following its 1994 national convention, the Progress Party of Norway lost its deputy leader and the four MPs Christiansen, Hillgaar, Wetterstad and Bråthen? | |||||||||
So...
[edit]This had been sitting on my hard drive as a Word document since April 2008 (!). In the meantime someone has got around to nominating Progress Party (Norway) as a GA candidate. Good, and this article hopefully broadens the coverage. I will nominate this for GA as well, though it could use desperately needs a copyedit from a native speaker. I looked for an infobox, but the one I found automatically included markup for a US prez election. Geschichte (talk) 22:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]- This review is transcluded from Talk:1994 Progress Party national convention/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk) 10:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I must say I wasn't expecting to ever see national conventions of Norwegian parties at GAN, but it is always nice to be positively surprised. I did a copyedit, but it wasn't as bad as Geschichte may have feared.
- Comments
- "On 7 February, Hagen confirmed his leadership candidacy for the electoral committee." isn't referenced.
- I've changed "central committee" to "central board", as it translate from styre and actually models that of any other board, given that it has authority.
- Days of the week are not included unless essential to the understanding.
- I think arbeidsutvalg should translate executive board, but I'm not 100% sure. I think it is more understanable than "working committee".
- Some of the refs lack accessdate (particularly the Stortinget bios).
Placing on hold. Arsenikk (talk) 10:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- I added one reference and four accessdates. I don't use it on non-websites, because those aren't "retrieved" in the same sense. Geschichte (talk) 14:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- There is of course not supposed to be accessdates on offline sources; sorry if that wasn't clear. Arsenikk (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- I added one reference and four accessdates. I don't use it on non-websites, because those aren't "retrieved" in the same sense. Geschichte (talk) 14:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- Quick comment
- We aren't meant to use curly quotes. Aaroncrick TALK 10:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- What's that? Geschichte (talk) 14:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- If you look carefully, there is a difference between “ ” and " ". Only the latter are supposed to be used, according to the MOS (those being the ones actually available on a normal keyboard). But nothing one can really say anything about at a GA review. Arsenikk (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- I guess some are present because I started writing the text in Word. Geschichte (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- If you look carefully, there is a difference between “ ” and " ". Only the latter are supposed to be used, according to the MOS (those being the ones actually available on a normal keyboard). But nothing one can really say anything about at a GA review. Arsenikk (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
- What's that? Geschichte (talk) 14:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC) Thanks! Geschichte (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
"Intro too long"
[edit]The template says to "moving some material from it into the body of the article". I hope we all agree that this is not a solution. Of course, everything in the lead is also in the article already. Geschichte (talk) 09:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
24 of 11?
[edit]In the County conventions and national board meeting section it says "a motion which gained support from 24 of the 11 board members", which seems impossible! Don't know what it should be, but it does need changing. Davewild (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1994 Progress Party national convention. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921192018/http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/politikk/article1772790.ece to http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/politikk/article1772790.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:32, 16 June 2017 (UTC)