Talk:Hurricane Lisa (1998)/GA1

GA Review

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

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 18:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Everything looks good, so I'm going to pass the article. My only, really picky, comment is that in the storm track image the top dot got partially chopped off - this has absolutely no bearing on GA status thought, and so congrats on another Good Article! Dana boomer (talk) 19:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll see what I can do about the track map. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 19:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)