Wikipedia:Peer review/Tropical Storm Charley (1998)/archive1

Tropical Storm Charley (1998)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I wish to nominate for FA shortly and would like to know what to work on prior to doing so.

Thanks, TheNobleSith (talk) 22:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Very good article. Some minor points which may be brought up at FAC...

"morning of the 21," don't like that, just add the month again.
Del Rio links to a disambiguation page. On more than one occasion.
" and seven people died" - more like "were killed".
The storm path image, while it uses the {{storm path}} template, should still conform with WP:MOS#Images - I think it's too small at the moment. But I could be wrong!
"At landfall on the 22nd" - WP:DATE.
"6 hours later" six. But "six hours later" is repeated in quick succession.
"Prolific, sometimes record amounts fell over much of south central Texas and northern Mexico." is this cited?
Woodsboro links to a dab page.
" by flooding .[2] " remove the space.
"The death toll in Texas stands at 13, all drownings" - suddenly into present tense?
"1003 mbar." could be converted.
Why is Colin in bold?

That's about it. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. All issues besides the image have been dealt with. I don't think its too small. Most articles with storm track images in that spot have them that size, including many GA and FA.TheNobleSith (talk) 15:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I may be wrong, it may comply with the MOS. However, just because it's used in other GA and FA it doesn't necessarily make it right! I'll double check what the storm path template is doing... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

However, just because it's used in other GA and FA it doesn't necessarily make it right! Good point. Stupid thing to say on my part in retrospect...anyway thanks for your help.TheNobleSith (talk) 16:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well I've dug into the {{storm path}} template, it's very basic and shows that the thumb is being forced to 150px width. Current manual of style just mandates the use of thumb for landscape images (rather than selecting a size) and this means all thumbs will be displayed, currently, at 180px. So my gut instinct was right, it's a little on the small size. Now this is a Project decision really, I'm not going to change the storm track template, but I strongly recommend it adopts a purist approach to the manual of style. Then everyone's a winner! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I altered the px on the template, to match it with the MOS. Thank you for your help!TheNobleSith (talk) 17:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I hope all the other users of the template are good with the modification too! All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]