Talk:Dust storm/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 07:23, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

gust front and suspension seem like terminology that should be linked.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
desert should be linked on first use.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why relink Saltation (geology) a second time, especially so soon after the first?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Chinadustmovie.gif might be better on the left, since at high res viewing it is pushed below all text in the section.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
static electric field may require two links to explain.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
negative charge could be cleared up by a link or two.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Link Drought on first use.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This section needs WP:RS throughout for WP:ICs. At least one per paragraph, but really one per factual statement.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to read this any further. For such a short article, this has major problems.

Half of the content in the two largest sections is in uncited paragraphs.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Much of the terminology should be linked for clarification.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple links appear on later uses rather than the first use.

The nominator should spend some time thinking about WP:WIAGA. This article clearly is failing 1b and 2b. I suspect it may fail 3a since I suspect that there have been individual sandstorms that have aritcles. The reader should know how to find the most famous sandstorms after reading this article. There is no discussion on seasonality of this phenomenon. I suspect that there are times of the year when these are more prevalent and if there are not that should be mentioned too. I might even take time to mention that sandstorms are or are not named events. This article is lacking and I am FAILING it now.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:45, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]