Talk:Cyclone Elisa (2008)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA class, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 22:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * I've done a copyedit, and things look good now. In the future, take a look through to make sure you're capitalizing everything right, not using contractions (don't, didn't), and not using the "&" symbol.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * The end of the "Impact, records, naming and aftermath" section needs a ref.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Just one issue with referencing, so I'm putting the article on hold. Drop me a note here or on my talk page if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 23:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Umm Dana i would off thought that the Wikitable thats there covers it as there have been no other cyclones during 2008/09Jason Rees (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, the table covers that part. Sorry, I should have been more clear, I actually meant the section of the paragraph that says "This was the first time that the name Elisa had been used worldwide. Elisa replaced the name Esau which was retired following the 1991–92 South Pacific cyclone season.". Dana boomer (talk) 23:39, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok Thanks for clearing that up Danna - That now presents me with a problem that i will have to have a look around to see if i can solve Jason Rees (talk) 23:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That statement is correct but hard to verfy. so im going to remove the bit i think youre talking about Jason Rees (talk) 00:03, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Done

I suppose that works. However, if you do find a source for the information in the future, please add it back in. Everything else looks good, so I'm passing the article. Dana boomer (talk) 15:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Merger
So the merger can take place i am declassifying this as a "good article".Jason Rees (talk) 02:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)