Misplaced Pages

Talk:Hurricane Doreen (1977)/GA1: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Talk:Hurricane Doreen (1977) Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:55, 12 July 2012 editYellow Evan (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers27,263 edits →GA Review: FYI← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:06, 1 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
Just a few comments: Just a few comments:
*I made some edits that you are free to change. *I made some edits that you are free to change.
**Make a slight tweak to one as Baja California is a state in MX as well as a peninsula. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC) **Make a slight tweak to one as Baja California is a state in MX as well as a peninsula. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
*"developed from a tropical disturbance offshore the coast of Africa. After developing on August 13," - kind of repetitious *"developed from a tropical disturbance offshore the coast of Africa. After developing on August 13," - kind of repetitious
**Removed the first part as it was not true AFAIK. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC) **Removed the first part as it was not true AFAIK. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
*] needs disambiguation *] needs disambiguation
**{{Done}}. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC) **{{Done}}. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
*"making Doreen the wettest tropical cyclone for the state of Nevada." - as of that date? *"making Doreen the wettest tropical cyclone for the state of Nevada." - as of that date?
**Yea, but the record has not been broken since. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC) **Yea, but the record has not been broken since. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
:** but you don't know when a view is reading this article. Perhaps they're read it a year from now, and that statement may not be true then. It's a rule somewhere in MoS not to use uncertain dates. I've changed it. ] (]) 17:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC) :** but you don't know when a view is reading this article. Perhaps they're read it a year from now, and that statement may not be true then. It's a rule somewhere in MoS not to use uncertain dates. I've changed it. ] (]) 17:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
:***If that rule is not in the ] or ] guidelines, then, it should not hold an article back from promotion, BTW. ]] ] ] 17:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC) :***If that rule is not in the ] or ] guidelines, then, it should not hold an article back from promotion, BTW. ]] ] ] 17:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
:****It is in the GA criteria 1: "words to watch" - not to use uncertain dates. (see ]) Now you've "edit conflicted my passing of your article. So you want to argue over this? ] (]) 18:03, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


I've changed it.
Otherwise the article looks fine. Will put on hold. ] (]) 17:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC) Otherwise the article looks fine. Will put on hold. ] (]) 17:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
**Thanks for the review. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC) **Thanks for the review. ]] ] ] 17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

*I've made a couple more copy edits.

'''] review-see ] for criteria''' (and ''']''' for what they are not)

#Is it '''reasonably well written'''?
#:a. prose: ], respects ], correct spelling and grammar:{{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#:b. complies with ] for ], ], ], ], and ]: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#Is it '''factually accurate''' and ''']'''?
#:a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the ]: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#:b. provides ] from ] where necessary:y {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#:c. ]: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#Is it '''broad in its coverage'''?
#:a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#:b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see ]): {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#Does it follow the '''] policy'''.
#:fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#Is it '''stable'''?
#: no ], etc: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#Does it '''contain ]''' to illustrate the topic?
#:a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have ]: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#:b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with ]: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::
#'''Overall''':
#:Pass or Fail: {{GAList/check|y}}
#::Pass!
#:: <!-- Template:GAList -->
Congratulations! ] (]) 18:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
**Again, thanks for the review. ]] ] ] 18:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 07:06, 1 February 2023

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 23:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

review

Just a few comments:

  • I made some edits that you are free to change.
  • "developed from a tropical disturbance offshore the coast of Africa. After developing on August 13," - kind of repetitious
  • San Carlos needs disambiguation
  • "making Doreen the wettest tropical cyclone for the state of Nevada." - as of that date?

I've changed it. Otherwise the article looks fine. Will put on hold. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

  • I've made a couple more copy edits.

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
    b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
    b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:y
    c. no original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
    fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    no edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Pass!

Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 18:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)