Jump to content

Talk:Tropical Storm Erika (2009)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleTropical Storm Erika (2009) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 11, 2009Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Erika (2009)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
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:

Pretty good overall, but there are some things that need work. The most significant problems:

  • Although it was a disorganized system, it was immediately declared a tropical storm. - As opposed to, what?
  • Although the cyclone was well-organized, it lacked a defined low-level circulation center, leading to the NHC not issuing advisories on the system at that time. - This is a tad confusing, since it couldn't have been too well-organized it it didn't have a low-level center...
  • This led to the NHC immediately declaring the low a tropical storm and naming it Erika, the fifth named storm of the 2009 season. - Very poorly constructed sentence.
  • In post-storm analysis of these readings, it was determined that they had over estimated the wind speeds in an area of unusually heavy rains. - Who's "they"?
  • The first paragraph of the Preparations section can simply be sourced to the TCR rather than numerous advisories.
  • Well, yes, but redundant or superfluous footnotes should be avoided whenever possible, and since the TCR already provides the same information in one centralized site, I think it would be better to cite that. –Juliancolton | Talk 15:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)r[reply]
  • The islands of Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy were placed under an orange alert and Guadeloupe was placed under a yellow alert. - What are orange and yellow alerts?
  • In Guadeloupe, heavy rainfall from Erika, peaking at 7.9 in (200 mm), leading to flooding in Côte-sous-le-Vent. - Grammar.
  • Overall the impact section makes use of passive voice far too often.

On-hold for now. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:00, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Forecasted Restrengthening

[edit]

Was Erika forecasted to make landfall in Puerto Rico?39.tg (talk)January 14 2011 —Preceding undated comment added 19:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Tropical Storm Erika (2009). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Tropical Storm Erika (2009). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tropical_Storm_Erika_(2009)&oldid=1211234645"