Talk:Hurricane Otis (2005)
Appearance
(Redirected from Talk:Hurricane Otis (2005)/Comments)
![]() | Hurricane Otis (2005) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences 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. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Otis (2005)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Lord Roem (talk) 02:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]Lead
- Not sure on the convention on this, but note the year in the lead??
- Wikilink tropical storm
- Done indirectly, by linking tropical cyclone to "hurricane" ("tropical storm" would be linked to the same page).
- Expand the lead to at least two paragraphs. See WP:LEAD.
- Not needed. The article is relatively brief, so it can be summarized adequately in the one paragraph that is there right now. If there's any specific facts or details you'd like to see added, let me know, but otherwise I don't see the need to add text for the sake of adding text. Juliancolton (talk) 21:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
History
- "By late on September 28..." should be "By late September 28...."
Preparations and mpx
- I think you can omit the two specific ships which reported high winds.
- This is a valid observation, so I'd prefer to leave it in. Juliancolton (talk) 21:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Other
- Links to several redirect/disambugation pages:
- Agua Blanca
- Comondu (redirect page)
- Miraflores
Concluding Thoughts
- Good writing. Certainly viable for promotion. Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 02:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. I've left a few comments above, but otherwise I've addressed most of your concerns. Juliancolton (talk) 21:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Great! Moving to promote now! Lord Roem (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. I've left a few comments above, but otherwise I've addressed most of your concerns. Juliancolton (talk) 21:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Assessment comment
[edit]The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hurricane Otis (2005)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
No lead section, blatant violations of WP:WPTC/S, no organization, severe grammar and conventions issues, excessive reliance on a single source, low accessibility, improperly illustrated... need I say more? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 06:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
|
Last edited at 01:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 18:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia good articles
- Natural sciences good articles
- GA-Class Weather articles
- Low-importance Weather articles
- GA-Class Tropical cyclone articles
- Low-importance Tropical cyclone articles
- WikiProject Tropical cyclones articles
- GA-Class Pacific hurricane articles
- Low-importance Pacific hurricane articles
- WikiProject Weather articles