Talk:Tropical Depression Two (2010)/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 01:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey TAWX; I'll be reviewing this soon. HurricaneFan 25 01:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed this GAN on hold pending the addressing of the comments below. HurricaneFan 25 15:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
The two things that quickly stand out to me is that there's a few rather terse sentences in the article. Try to fix those.

The second is the usage of "abbreviation" or "uncommon" jargon — for example, the NHC noted in their Tropical Weather Outlook.... IMO, the best option would be to use the NHC noted that... The first usage of "NHC" in the article doesn't explain what it was. You should always try to keep the reader "informed" throughout the article. The origins of Tropical Depression Two can be traced back to a disorganized tropical wave that was first noted by the NHC... should be The origins of Tropical Depression Two are from a disorganized tropical wave that was first noted by the National Hurricane Center (NHC)... The beginning of the sentence is needlessly wordy; the above wording is more concise, IMO. The link is formatted as such per this.

It formed on July 8 from a tropical wave that emerged off the western coast of Africa and crossed the Atlantic Ocean without any development. — remove the and and reword it a bit to It formed from a tropical wave that emerged off the coast of Africa. Given the next sentence, it isn't necessary to say "July 8" just yet. It's somewhat obvious that it crossed the Atlantic, given the lede (2010 Atlantic hurricane season).

However, once in the western Gulf of Mexico, conditions become more conducive for development, and it is estimated that Tropical Depression Two formed at 0600 UTC on July 8. UTC should be linked here, not everyone knows what it is. Also, you should indicate that it traveled into the Gulf of Mexico. However, when it entered the Gulf of Mexico, it encountered a conducive environment for tropical cyclone development, and was designated Tropical Depression Two at 0600 UTC on July 8.

Intensification into a tropical storm was initially anticipated by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) — two problems here. Look at the linking problem a few points above; also, you should explain that tropical storm is a status on the Saffir–Simpson Hurricane Scale — which would probably be best conveyed through a link to the article.

the depression never failed to attain the status — I hope that was a mistake!

The depression later made landfall on South Padre Island, Texas — you're over-using "depression" in the lede; I'd rather see "it" here, and "later" is unnecessary. It made landfall on South Padre Island, Texas

and dissipating the following day — watch the voice you use; don't switch between passive. and dissipated the following day

Due to the system's weak intensity, there were no reports of wind damage across Texas or Mexico — change to Due to the system's weak intensity, there were no reports of damage inflicted by winds across Texas or Mexico — it explains it better.

an area severely affected by Hurricane Alex just one week previous. — explain it better here; reword it to which suffered the effects of Hurricane Alex one week earlier. or something like that.

as it moved off the western coast of Africa, and into the Atlantic Ocean. Cut off the last bit; put it into the next sentence. as it moved off the western coast of Africa.

Moving towards the west over the Atlantic Ocean — see above

until July 3, as it entered — remove unnecessary comma; until July 3 as it entered...

Over the following 24 hours, continued organization occurred, and subsequently You already talked a bit about organization; maybe During the 24 hours that followed, it continued to coalesce, and the NHC subsequently increased the disturbance's chance of developing into a tropical cyclone. We don't link NHC here, but we rather simply use the abbreviation, as per if it is changed to the point a few spots above. Upped isn't a very "professional" term; increased is, and IMO, it just sounds better.

However, a defined surface circulation did not form before the wave moved over the Yucatan Peninsula and lost organization — two problems here. The "however" should be removed. It should be reworded to something like A defined surface circulation did not form as a result of the wave's movement over the Yucatan Peninsula, and the system lost organization.

The system remained disorganized as it traversed the peninsula; it eventually emerged into the Gulf of Mexico on July 7. The semicolon is unnecessary and should be replaced with an "and" and the "it" should be removed. Since it already entered the Gulf of Mexico, it should read The system remained disorganized as it traversed the peninsula and eventually re-emerged into the Gulf of Mexico on July 7.

developing into a tropical cyclone within the next 48 hours — non-breaking space needed between "48" and "hours" per MOS:NBSP.

had developed a closed circulation and the NHC — avoid passive voice; remove the "had".

the second of the season — change it to making it the second of the hurricane season for clarity.

Additionally, the depression — Remove the "additionally" as the previous sentence is not completely "linked" to this one.

The NHC predicted that Tropical Depression Two → Tropical Depression Two was forecasted to...before making landfall in Mexico

During a reconnaissance mission at 1200 UTC — During? It should be "following", which is more concise.

Change the depression was not classified to the depression was not classified as a tropical storm for clarity.

where the NHC discontinued advisories on the system — when, not where

the Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (HPC) — Change link to Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (HPC) per above.

early on July 10 — early during July 10

A tropical storm warning was also issued by the government of Mexico, stretching from Rio San Fernando northward also to the mouth of the Rio Grande River — the current wording implies that the government of Mexico issued both wordings, which is incorrect. The United States only issues TRW/TRAs for its own territories; individual governments do that for theirs. This can be fixed by adding "in addition," before "a tropical storm warning" here.

issued by the local National Weather Services — add a link to National Weather Service and reword as such, as offices is more clear: issued by local National Weather Service offices

with possibly 10 in (250 mm) in some areas — weasels are wailing here. with 10 in (250 mm) locally.

Alerts were also issued for the Mexican states of — what type of alerts? Can you clarify?

A link to Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil, Prevención y Mitigación de Desastres is necessary to clarify what the agency is, and should be formatted like this per above: [[Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil, Prevención y Mitigación de Desastres|Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil (National Civil Protection System)]]

the highest level — it's clear here now; change it to the highest level on the scale

Two funnel clouds were reported in relation to the depression: one near Rockport and the other near Victoria. — use an em dash, like this (—) instead of a comma. Two funnel clouds were reported in relation to the depression — one near...

As dissipating Tropical Depression Two moved inland, the HPC advisories → As Tropical Depression Two dissipated, it moved inland and the HPC's advisories indicated that much of eastern and southern Texas experienced rainfall of at least 1 in (25 mm), with the exception of...

had peaked at — remove "had" (passive voice)

while the Victoria Regional Airport reports precipitation — use the correct tense. while the Victoria Regional Airport reported precipitation...

dropped by Hurricane Alex just south of the Rio Grande River seems to imply that all of the rain from Alex fell just south of the Rio Grande River, which it didn't. This needs clarification.

That's it.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Remember to use non-breaking spaces where necessary per MOS:NBSP
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
All citations appear to be fine — no dead ones, though reference #20 should cite a specific page as you did with references #15–17 if possible.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Thanks for the review! -- TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 17:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]