Talk:Meteorological history of Hurricane Luis/GA1

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


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Comments:


 * 1) The storm originated from an area of low pressure associated with a tropical wave. <-- Yeah, uh, when?
 * 2) ...with a well-defined 46 mi- (74 km) wide eye <-- fix convert/whatever there (don't need the hyphen)
 * 3) I would suggest removing the place names from the headers for consistency.
 * 4) Add a piece of records to the lead.
 * 5) Wikilink Greenland.
 * 6) Split second paragraph of the Bermuda/dissipation section.
 * 7) Find a better image than File:Hurricane Luis on September 6 1995.png.

After this, i am going to put it on hold for fixing.Mitch/HC32 20:05, 13 June 2009 (UTC)