Talk:Tropical Storm Blanca (2009)/GA2

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

The problems with the article mainly lie in the fact that GA was much more leniant in 2009, and that it no longer meets that. The article is like 13,000 bytes. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:26, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Why do we need a reassessment? I know your just trying to have the article stay, but there isn't anything special about it. It's not cross year, and it didn't cause a lot of damage. I like  hurricanes  23:03, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * in my heart, I really like the article. And I want it to stay. But I know without reassessment that won’t happen. So I want to give it a chance. I will give it a real strong oppose if it fails. Can you help with reassessment? HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 23:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Review by Chicdat
✅ HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC) I didn’t do the first part as it wouldn’t sound “encyclopediac”, but I did the 2nd part. HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:13, 13 November 2020 (UTC) ✅ HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 13:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC) ❌ I couldn't find any references besides NHC archives. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:13, 13 November 2020 (UTC) ✅ HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 15:16, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Change "though it not expected to become a hurricane" to "though it was not expected to become a hurricane".
 * Change "curved banding-features" and "already developed an eye-feature" to "curved banding features" and "developed an eye feature".
 * Whoops, sorry. I accidentally said "curved banging features". 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me!  12:05, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Add more references to the first paragraph.
 * Change "The following day, Blanca dissipated over open waters" to "By the following day, Blanca had dissipated over open waters".

🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 11:37, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Change "Tropical Storm Blanca originated from a tropical wave..." to "Blanca's origins can be traced back to a tropical wave...". Also, I'm going to stop doing this, because no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 11:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Can someone else continue the review? We shouldn't merge before this concludes. it's improper to close if there's an outstanding reassessment. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 18:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging, the most active editor on WPTC. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me!  11:27, 17 November 2020 (UTC)