Talk:Hurricane Kristy (2006)/GA1

GA Review

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

I am going to be reviewing this article which is currently up for Good Article Nomination. I should have the full review out within an hour or so. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
"However, satellite-derived intensity estimates suggested the hurricane could have been as strong as 105 mph (170 km/h), or as weak as a tropical storm." I didn't see any note about the intensity being as high as 105mph

Reference 19 doesn't seem to have any importance to the article, making the sentence it was meant for unreferenced.
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:

Overall a great article, there are only two things concerning references and possibly OR. Once those two issues are addressed, the article will be promoted. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the one link, which was stupid on my part. The part about the intensity being 105 mph (90 kt) is from the discussion sourced (though wasn't showing up for some reason). ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good now. I'm passing the article, good job :D Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]