Talk:Hurricane Alex (2010)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ★ Auree _talk 05:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

Comments

Resolved comments from ★ Auree talk
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Lede "[...] to form in the 2010 Atlantic hurricane season. Forming [...]" – tweak for less repetitiveness "and produced over $1.8 billion (2010 USD) of damages." – odd wording Switched words. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) "Fourteen people were killed in Central America during Alex's first landfall as a result of flooding" → Fourteen people were killed in Central America as a result of flooding during Alex's first landfall. Fixed to your suggestion. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) "the outer rainbands of the storm" – the storm is already mentioned a bit often, so I think "outer rainbands" would suffice. Fixed to your suggestion. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) "killed three in Acapulco, one person in Oaxaca, and one person in Chiapas." – I'd suggest "killed three people in Acapulco, one person in Oaxaca, and another in Chiapas" for a bit more prose diversity. Fixed to your suggestion. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Same goes for the succeeding sentence... "deaths," "deaths," "deaths," and "deaths" Removed the plethora of deaths. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) I don't think a storm "produces" outages; it causes or triggers them. Changed to "triggered". Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:25, 21 July 2011 (UTC) Meteorological history "thunderstorm activity spread across Puerto Rico, Hispaniola, Jamaica, and eastern Cuba" – to avoid prose cluttering, change all of those locations to just Greater Antilles? "remained favorable for eventual development." – It's mentioned that it had already developed prior. I suggest saying redevelopment "had gradually became" – grammar The article mentions the development of a low-level circulation initially, but then goes on to say a surface low developed by 1800 UTC. It once again mentions the circulation in the subsequent sentence. A bit later, you again mention a surface low, and that its formation was confirmed on June 25. Was it not initially confirmed to have existed, or was it a different low? Are the two circulations mentioned the same, and which is associated with the low that apparently formed after the establishment of a low-level circulation or what? I'm a bit confused as to what's going on here. "indicatedthe" – messy "become tropical depression" – messy "to inhibit the storm" is a bit redundant, since it has already been mentioned that the anticyclone is positioned over the storm. "itobtained" – Be consistent with time notations throughout the mh. Initially, the article only notes UTC times (which is preferable and recommended), but then goes on to include CDT times. Judging from the first two paragraphs, I think this still needs a thorough copy-edit. ★ Auree talk 03:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC) Preparations Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula – I don't think Mexico needs to be linked again A tropical storm warning was posted – posted? for the duration of the storm → during the storm "Thirteen shelters were opened in Reynosa,[37] twenty-two in Matamoros, and ten in San Fernando; a total of 3,000 people sought protection from the storm in the three shelters" – which three shelters? There are a total of 45 shelters mentioned. "90 shelters were opened throughout the state" – any way you can avoid opening the sentence with a number? "which would potentially cause" – not too sure about this wording That's all for the preparations section. ★ Auree talk 04:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC) I fixed all of the prose issues listed, except for the shelter thing... I have no idea what's up with that... Juliancolton (talk) 00:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC) Fixed the "three shelters" thing. It should have been "shelters in the three municipalities". Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 10:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC) I'm satisfied. One more quibble for the MH: "At 0200 UTC on July 1, the National Hurricane Center indicated that Alex had made landfall with maximum sustained winds of 105 mph (165 km/h), gusts of 125 mph (205 km/h) and an unusually low central pressure of 947 millibars (28.0 inHg) in the municipality of Soto la Marina in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas.[25][26] After the storm, this intensity estimate was revised to sustained winds of 110 mph (175 km/h) a central pressure of 946 millibars (27.9 inHg)." – I feel this part doesn't match the rest of the MH's standards. Any way we could tighten it up a bit? The wikilinking here also seems a bit excessive. ★ Auree talk 19:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC) Impact: This section is a bit over-detailed, but probably nothing detrimental to GA status "Be consistent in whether inch or mm is mentioned first, and how you note inch. Right now, there's a mix of in and inches throughout the section "The system produced rainfall across the Greater Antilles in the central Caribbean Sea" – which system? Alex or its precursor? "the majority of whom were temporarily relocated" – I'm not sure if this is grammatically correct "Although it has stayed relatively clear of the site, the approach of Tropical Storm Alex did cause BP to delay by a week plans to increase oil capture from the leak" – this sentence reads a bit oddly to me "In Chiapas, one person, from Guatemala, died and four more were injured when their bus rolled over as it traveled over a damaged highway" – same as above, especially with all the commas "The storm's most significant effect fro in the region was excessive rainfall, which was reported throughout the region" – typo, plus slightly repetitive "between 97.25 mm (3.829 in) and 315.5 mm (12.42 in) were reported at weather stations statewide" – mm of what? Also, don't we note inch totals first? "The pluviometer at Estanzuela reported that a total of 890 mm (35 in) of rainfall were recorded;[71] in Arroyo Seco, in San Pedro Garza García, 588 mm (23.1 in) of precipitation was recorded" – inconsistency: should it be x in (x mm) of rainfall/prec was recorded, or were recorded? "About 80% of Matamoros was under water, including at least 400 neighbourhoods, some flooded under a foot of water,[64] forcing 4,000 people to shelters" – a bit of a long, cluttered sentence "with damage in additional municipalities still being inspected[95]" – this is probably very outdated by now Throughout the Nuevo Leon section, the tenses used imply recency. "one bricklayer who died after a housing unit under construction collapsed on top of him; two men and a woman who died after their vehicle rolled over and crashed into a semi-trailer truck due to the intense rainfall; a 25-year-old who was swept away by swift currents and pinned against a fence; an elderly man who died after a wall toppled over him, a woman who died after a large boulder from a rock slide fell on her home, and a young man who fell onto the Arroyo Topo Chico." – way too detailed "The flooded stream washed away multiple parked vehicles,[105] a popular flea market and sport facilities built in a riverside greenway;[106] while it destroyed about 45 kilometres (28 mi) of Monterrey's main arterial streets[74]" – poor flow "causing intermittent availability of telecommunication services" – "intermittent unavailability" would sound better here, since the services were initially available "Thousands of citizens in Ciudad Acuña were evacuated after Arroyo Las Vacas flooded after 40 in (1,000 mm) of rain fell on nearby mountain ranges" – after, after gets a bit confusing "36 hour period" – hyphenate 36-hour "McAllen, Texas, measured 6.66 inches (169 mm) on June 30 and is now the city's wettest June day on record" – weird wording "About $10 million (2010 USD) of agricultural damage were reported in Hidalgo County from Alex" – grammar That's it for this section. A bit over-detailed in some areas, but on the other hand it's extremely thorough and comprehensive. Definitely GA+ worthy. ★ Auree talk 19:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC) Changes done. Keep 'em coming. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:10, 30 July 2011 (UTC) Aftermath "$4.8 billion (2010 MXN; $375 million USD) were released by" – grammar "rescue capabilities, in Laredo" – unnecessary comma "animal husbandry: In" – lowercase "in" That's all for this section. Good work on this article! ★ Auree talk 21:46, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Excellent sourcing throughout the article.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   A thorough and comprehensive read for sure, though some part seem a bit detailed.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. 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):

   Public domain images with relevant captions

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Pass despite a few overly detailed sections, as this article definitely meets GA criteria. Very nice work on this; it was a great read! ★ Auree _talk 22:06, 30 July 2011 (UTC)