Jump to content

Talk:Hurricane Jimena (2003)/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    In the Storm history section, it would be best to add the year the Hurricane took effect.
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    In the Storm history section, "National Hurricane Center" is linked twice, it would be best for it to be linked once, here. In the Preparations and Impact section, it would be best to add (CPHC) after "Central Pacific Hurricane Center", I mean I know what it is, but how 'bout the person that reads this article. Question: Should "Jimena" be bolded in the Preparations and Impact section? Same section, "Hawaii" and "Big Island" should only be linked once. The article has a "red link", if it doesn't have an article, it would be best to un-link it, per here. In case I forgot to mention other repeats, please make sure that the sections in the article are linked once.
    Check. Question: What "Glenwood" is the article talking about? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Hawaii, fixed. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 17:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the above statement can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to butt in and help out. Fixed the overlinking and added the year to the storm history. Should be good now. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to Juliancolton for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]