Talk:Hurricane Sandra (2015)/GA1

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

Reviewer: KN2731 (talk · contribs) 09:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, this is my first GA review.

Criteria

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Article looks decent, only some minor issues listed below.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Flow of the article is smooth and makes a good read.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Inline citations all done properly. Lots of sources supporting the "Records" section.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Compact and detailed, but doesn't overload the reader with information.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * No biased views here, just facts.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * All satellite images are in the public domain and shouldn't cause any copyright issues.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Just some minor stuff below.
 * Just some minor stuff below.

Other issues
Lede Meteorological history
 * Link tropical depression in second sentence?
 * "evacuated some residents" – 180 residents is more than 15% of Boca Camichin's population, which is just under 1100 (source).
 * "dissipated into a trough" – is "degenerated" more appropriate?

These should be easy to fix, after which I'll be more than ready to pass the article. ~ KN2731 {talk} 09:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Specified 180 residents in the lede rather than percentages. I went with "some" since 180 people is quite minor for a hurricane evacuation but using percentages can be misleading. Also used changed "dissipated" to "opened up" instead of "degenerated" simply to avoid repetition. Thanks for the review, ! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 14:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)