Talk:Hurricane Fausto (2008)/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) 15:55, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Meteorological history section, "The origins of Hurricane Fausto were in a westward-moving tropical wave that moved off the eastern coast". Moving/moved...please reword.
 * Meteorological history section, "A deep-layer area of high pressure". I'm not sure what is meant by "deep-layer area".
 * Preparations and impact, "Fausto made its closest approach to the island about 115 mi (185 km) from the island." To the island/from the island...please reword.
 * 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:
 * Overall a nice article. Just a few prose tweaks needed, so I'm placing the review on hold. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 16:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I've fixed the three issues, thanks for the review :) Cyclonebiskit 17:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything looks good, so I'm passing the article. Nice work, and thanks for the prompt response. Dana boomer (talk) 18:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall a nice article. Just a few prose tweaks needed, so I'm placing the review on hold. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Dana boomer (talk) 16:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I've fixed the three issues, thanks for the review :) Cyclonebiskit 17:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything looks good, so I'm passing the article. Nice work, and thanks for the prompt response. Dana boomer (talk) 18:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)