Talk:Tropical Depression One (1993)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 20:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Criterion
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- 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:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- 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):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Passed
- Pass or Fail:
To Work On list (specifics)
[edit]The track should be fine now. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Not sure Should a NOAA Overlay & NASA Background not have the appropriate tags. (aka this is not a user created image, it is user complied. They don't hold the copyright. /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 01:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I think they do. The NASA image is of course in the public domain, and the track itself is user-generated. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:35, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Fixed After advice from other user. /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 23:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, I think they do. The NASA image is of course in the public domain, and the track itself is user-generated. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:35, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- 6B: image on the left needs more explanation. (ex. you could put: yadayada from (government org) on (storm) of (year)) In general, needs to be detailed.
- 2B: Intro needs sourcing on statistics.
- Thanks for the review BTW. Well, all of the intro is sourced later in the article. The damage statistics are directly from the impact section, so there doesn't need to be a source up there. As for the image on the left, I took care of it. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:09, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]Please do not change the status of the criterion, the reviewer will change that their selfs.
Good Job so far! /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 01:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)