Talk:Tropical Storm Gilma (2006)/GA1

GA Review

I will be reviewing this article for GA, and should have the full review up within a few hours.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. 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):

   • An image for this storm may not be necessary but it wouldn't hurt to have one

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Another well written article Julian. Other than an image (if possible), the article passes. If you can't find a useful one, it wont really do much since the storm was short lived. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. As the article is very short, there isn't much room for another picture, without unnecessary whitespace. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 15:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on another GA then :) Keep up the good work. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)