Talk:Typhoon Warren/GA1

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

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 23:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Opening statement[edit]

Hello, and come what may from this review, thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. During the review, I may make copyedits, which I will limit to spelling correction and minor changes to punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. The Nominator(s) should understand that I am a grammar pedant, and I will nitpick in the interest of prose quality. For responding to my comments, please use  Done,  Fixed, plus Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or minus Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 23:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prose[edit]

  • (Re)Move the citation in the lead (during July 1988.[1]).
    •  Not done, that's the only mention of the local name in the article though.
  • At 00:00 UTC on July 14, the JMA declared the system a tropical storm.[6] On the evening of July 14, the JTWC upgraded Warren to a typhoon.[2] Condense.
  • Footnote [nb3] would be useful to have in the lead and/or infobox, too.
  • one hundred-six [...] one hundred eighty-seven Why not replace these with numerals? You've done the same for other casualty figures in the article.
  • Across the Guangdong Province, Axe "the".

GA progress[edit]

Images are free/tagged and relevant. Article passes CopyVio detector. References are credible. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 00:32, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Thanks for the review :D YE Pacific Hurricane 01:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.