Talk:Tropical Depression Nine (2000)/GA1

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

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 17:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * In the second paragraph of the Storm history section, you say "with ship reported indicating the possibility". What?
 * Simple grammar mistake; fixed. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  17:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * Pass/Fail:

One little prose issue is all that stands between this article and GA, so I am putting the article on hold to allow time to address it :) Let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, everything looks good, so I'm passing the article. Nice job! Dana boomer (talk) 18:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the speedy review! –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  18:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)