Talk:Hurricane Doreen (1977)/GA1

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 23:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Just a few comments:
 * Hi, I'll review this article! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * review
 * I made some edits that you are free to change.
 * Make a slight tweak to one as Baja California is a state in MX as well as a peninsula. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "developed from a tropical disturbance offshore the coast of Africa. After developing on August 13," - kind of repetitious
 * Removed the first part as it was not true AFAIK. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * San Carlos needs disambiguation
 * ✅. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "making Doreen the wettest tropical cyclone for the state of Nevada." - as of that date?
 * Yea, but the record has not been broken since. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * but you don't know when a view is reading this article. Perhaps they're read it a year from now, and that statement may not be true then. It's a rule somewhere in MoS not to use uncertain dates. I've changed it. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If that rule is not in the layout or lead guidelines, then, it should not hold an article back from promotion, BTW. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  17:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It is in the GA criteria 1: "words to watch" - not to use uncertain dates. (see relative time references) Now you've "edit conflicted my passing of your article. So you want to argue over this?  MathewTownsend (talk) 18:03, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I've changed it. Otherwise the article looks fine. Will put on hold. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:02, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  17:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I've made a couple more copy edits.

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 18:12, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
 * b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
 * b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:y
 * c. no original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
 * fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * no edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass!
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * no edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass!
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass!
 * Again, thanks for the review. YE  Pacific   Hurricane  18:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)