Talk:Typhoon Ida (1958)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 16:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll probably do finish this review by 23:00 UTC, but I might not have the time to do so. There's a bit of info from Longshore, 1998 that I might add to the article. I'm consulting it for this GA review.  HurricaneFan 25  16:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * And no, TAWX, you don't get to fix these for Hink. Face-tongue.svg  HurricaneFan 25  21:32, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * A link to 1958 Pacific typhoon season in the lede wouldn't be harmful.
 * On September 22 Ida turned to the north A comma is needed here, right after "22". On September 22, Ida turned to the north
 * It became extratropical the next day Link extratropical to extratropical cyclone as not everyone knows what they are.
 * No pre-tropical cyclonegenesis in the MH?
 * However, over a 14 hour period Use a hyphen, not a non-breaking space. However, over a 14-hour period
 * Link UTC the first time you use it, not the second time you use it.
 * and at about 0500 "at about" sound strange. Reword it to something like and near 0500
 * The winds gradually decreased → Ida's winds gradually decreased
 * the Kano River flooding destroyed two villages along the Izu Peninsula Reword to the flooding of the Kano River destroyed to villages along the Izu Peninsula for clarity.
 * the landslides and flooding occurred in populated areas Remove this; it's pretty obvious given what you said right before that.
 * Publishers in the prose should be italicized. (e.g. A report by Time magazine)
 * 520,000 homes were flooded, which is the most on record The most on record for where? The prefecture? Japan? Internationally?
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail: