Talk:Hurricane Barry (1983)/GA1

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

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 00:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * Everything looks great with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Nice work! The only nitpick I have is that you switch back and forth with using convert templates or not. This isn't something to hold the GA status up over, though, so I am passing the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 00:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * Everything looks great with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Nice work! The only nitpick I have is that you switch back and forth with using convert templates or not. This isn't something to hold the GA status up over, though, so I am passing the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 00:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything looks great with this article, so I am passing it to GA status. Nice work! The only nitpick I have is that you switch back and forth with using convert templates or not. This isn't something to hold the GA status up over, though, so I am passing the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 00:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)