Talk:Tropical Storm Laura (1971)/GA1

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

Reviewer: 12george1 (talk) 06:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 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):
 * Images comply to fair use requirements, with suitable captioning.
 * 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):
 * Images comply to fair use requirements, with suitable captioning.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments: This is my first time review an article for GA, I think it is wrong that you had to wait this long. Anyway, I have a few minor suggestions before I can pass or fail. On the final paragraph about the ACE of Laura, it is stated "Tropical Storm Laura set the record for having the highest accumulated cyclone energy of any named North Atlantic tropical cyclone that did not attain hurricane status, with a value of 8.61. This value is an approximation of the kinetic energy used by a tropical system throughout its existence. There was a tropical storm in 1913 that had a value of 15.6325.", the sentence is rather confusing, as the reader would be puzzled why they were just told that Laura had a higher ACE value, but then the last sentence about the tropical storm in 1913 have a higher amount. I think that that last sentence would be better read as this: "Tropical Storm Laura set the record for having the highest accumulated cyclone energy of any named North Atlantic tropical cyclone that did not attain hurricane status, with a value of 8.61, although an unnamed tropical storm in 1913 had an ACE of 15.6325", or something similar. Bottom line: your readers might think that the article is contradicting itself. There is another issue I have, some of the references have their cited webpage having a specific date, although it would says that year (1971) on those. Reference numbers 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 12 have only the year listed, but there is a specific date on the page that is being cited. Remember to make them consistent with the reference #11, having the date as xxxx-xx-xx (year, month, and date numerically).--12george1 (talk) 06:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC).
 * Those were my only issues with the article, so I will pass Tropical Storm Laura for GA.--12george1 (talk) 18:27, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Yea, thanks for the catch about the ACE. I added that 1913 one after I initially wrote it, and it shouldn't matter about named storm or not, so I changed the wording. I got the refs, too. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:23, 17 November 2010 (UTC)