Talk:Tropical Storm Dolly (2002)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS): 
- There should be no new information and therefore no references in the lead.
- Either use convert templates all the time or none of the time, don't go back and forth.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
I am putting this article on hold in order to allow time to deal with the two minor concerns detailed above. Feel free to drop me a note if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, seemed to be the same problem as with the Josephine article. I've replaced all the convert templates with text now and removed the reference from the lead. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yup, exactly the same problem :) I think each editor has his/her blind spots (I know I do)! Not a big deal, and everything looks great now, so I'm passing the article. Nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)