Talk:Tropical Storm Dolly (2002)/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 within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * There should be no new information and therefore no references in the lead.
 * Either use convert templates all the time or none of the time, don't go back and forth.
 * 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:

I am putting this article on hold in order to allow time to deal with the two minor concerns detailed above. Feel free to drop me a note if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, seemed to be the same problem as with the Josephine article. I've replaced all the convert templates with text now and removed the reference from the lead. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, exactly the same problem :) I think each editor has his/her blind spots (I know I do)!  Not a big deal, and everything looks great now, so I'm passing the article.  Nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)