Talk:Cyclone Owen/GA3

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: CommanderWaterford (talk · contribs) 08:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Chicdat: and @MarioJump83:, I will put this GA Review temporarily on hold - there are several minor issues which still need to be fixed: 1. Please provide time stamps in the subtitles for each and every photo of the Cyclone 2. I marked inside several Failed verifications and When Templates - we need somewhat to be more precise "Early the following day"=When exactly? // "Shortly after", same issue. 3. There is no attack mentioned, "only" the presence of crocodiles in the waters 4. "rainfall in Halifax reaching 661 mm" - not mentioned in the inlined citation. Thanks, CommanderWaterford (talk) 13:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Responses.

To number 3, there was no attack.

To number 4, please see the previous GA reviews for the reason. If you are going to review an article for GA, and it has previous reviews, you should at least look at them.

Thank you, 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 13:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chicdat, don't excuse these things with that reason, I'll fix them. @CommanderWaterford: That was quick, fixed. Mario Jump 83! 13:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chicdat If there was no attack why did you mention an attack?? This is usually a clear Fail-criteria for a GA. I read the Reviews before and I honestly was pretty shocked about the amount of issues the article had when you nominated it for GA, in other words: Without the help of the several other editors your original article would never pass GA.

@MarioJump83 Thank you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 14:01, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chicdat: CommanderWaterford is right here. I have been taking all my efforts into here to put you in greatest position to succeed and get your first article into GA status.

@CommanderWaterford: you may continue your review. Mario Jump 83! 14:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Third time is a charm. Mario Jump 83! 10:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]