Talk:Typhoon Dot (1989)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sven Manguard (talk · contribs) 17:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
GAN Quicksheet 1.22 SM
(Criteria)
Starting comments:
My third article in a row from the hurricane writer group, and the third article in a row that was largely ready for promotion when it hit GAN. Not a coincidence, and not at all something I'm unhappy with.
1. Well written:
- a. prose/copyright:
Needs work
Acceptable
- - It needs a very light copyedit, which I will do shortly.
- - Done, please check my CE.
- - Should the alternate name, Kuring, be added to the opening sentence in bold, as is done with alternate names in other subjects? Less so, should 5W (or 05W) be mentioned at all in the lead?
- It's not a necessity in my opinion. I take it more as a stylistic thing and opt out of including the rash of identifiers and alternate names. But if it's that important I'll add it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - I'd like for you to include Kuring, if only so that we can pretend en.Wikipedia isn't horribly western-centric.
- Added it Cyclonebiskit (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- - I'd like for you to include Kuring, if only so that we can pretend en.Wikipedia isn't horribly western-centric.
- It's not a necessity in my opinion. I take it more as a stylistic thing and opt out of including the rash of identifiers and alternate names. But if it's that important I'll add it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - I'm not sure where to draw the line on paraphrasing. The sentence about shutting down the copper plant came about as close to 'this is unacceptably close paraphrasing' as I saw in the article. I'll have to think on how to handle that.
- I've reworded it a bit. I believe it should be acceptable now. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - I tweaked it even more as part of the CE. It's okay now.
- Thanks Cyclonebiskit (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- - I tweaked it even more as part of the CE. It's okay now.
- I've reworded it a bit. I believe it should be acceptable now. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - It needs a very light copyedit, which I will do shortly.
- b. MoS compliance: Acceptable
2. Accurate and verifiable: Section acceptable 
Section acceptable
- a. provides references: Acceptable
- b. proper citation use:
AcceptableNeeds work Acceptable
- -
Critical!- Your second source, "Ens Richard L. Jeffries (1990). "1989 Annual Tropical Cyclone Report: Typhoon Dot (05W)" (PDF). Joint Typhoon Warning Center. United States Navy. pp. 52–55. Retrieved January 1, 2012.", is dead. Please fix that. Sorry that I just caught this now.- Done Cyclonebiskit (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- - That was really fast. Good show.
- Done Cyclonebiskit (talk) 05:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- -
- c. no original research: Acceptable
3. Broad in coverage: Section acceptable
- a. covers main aspects: Acceptable
- b. focused/on topic: Acceptable
4. Neutral: Section acceptable
5. Stable: 
Question
- - This article was built largely in a single edit (off wiki development?), and was put up at GAN the same day it became live. If anything that makes it too stable. Since it looks like I'm only the third person to see it, do you mind particularly if I leave this nomination open for a week to let the article decant?
- Nope, wrote it in one shot :) I've had many articles like this in the past where I've nominated it on the day I wrote it and there hasn't been an issue. But if it has to, I guess I can't complain about letting it sit for a week. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - Good
- Nope, wrote it in one shot :) I've had many articles like this in the past where I've nominated it on the day I wrote it and there hasn't been an issue. But if it has to, I guess I can't complain about letting it sit for a week. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - This article was built largely in a single edit (off wiki development?), and was put up at GAN the same day it became live. If anything that makes it too stable. Since it looks like I'm only the third person to see it, do you mind particularly if I leave this nomination open for a week to let the article decant?
6. Image use: Section acceptable
- a. license/tagging correct:
Needs work Acceptable
- - The licenses for both File:Dot jun 9 1989 0620Z.jpg and File:Dot jun 10 1989 0610Z.jpg need work. The source statement indicates that this is a composite, but I'm struggling to figure out how that would be possible, and I can't find anything on either source that would help generate those images. I have found replacements, and will handle them myself if it's needed, but I left a message to the uploader at Commons (who is still active), and we'll see if that pans out within the next week or so.
- I'm not sure how that database works myself. I've tried it before and black and white images. The uploader is calling it a composite because the terrain colors are taken from here and applied to the image. Regardless, the original source of both are NASA. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - I'm speaking with the uploader soon. I'll get back to you on this shortly, but it looks like it won't be an issue.
- - Should have checked before my last update. This has been done for a few hours. Everything is green now.
- - I'm speaking with the uploader soon. I'll get back to you on this shortly, but it looks like it won't be an issue.
- I'm not sure how that database works myself. I've tried it before and black and white images. The uploader is calling it a composite because the terrain colors are taken from here and applied to the image. Regardless, the original source of both are NASA. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- - The licenses for both File:Dot jun 9 1989 0620Z.jpg and File:Dot jun 10 1989 0610Z.jpg need work. The source statement indicates that this is a composite, but I'm struggling to figure out how that would be possible, and I can't find anything on either source that would help generate those images. I have found replacements, and will handle them myself if it's needed, but I left a message to the uploader at Commons (who is still active), and we'll see if that pans out within the next week or so.
- b. relevant/properly captioned: Acceptable
7. Additional items not required for a GA, but requested by the reviewer
- a. images have alt texts: Acceptable
- - Not really needed for these images, and anyways I won't do them until after 6a is resolved if I decide to add them in.
- b. article is suitable for solid copy export: Acceptable
- c. catch all general aesthetics: Acceptable
Comments after the initial review:
I'm going to give this a week to see if the image issue pans out and to give other people time to see the article. In case something happens and I disappear (highly unlikely), or if I forget where the source for the new image is (more likely), it's http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/rsad/hursat/movie.php
I'll check back in a few hours to see if you respond to anything here. It's been a pleasure thus far. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review Sven! I appreciate the comments :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Things are moving nicely, with most of the issues resolved or resolving but a new problem has surfaced, which I detailed at 2b. Hopefully it's not that hard to fix. That and the addition of Kuring (1a) are the only outstanding issues you can work on. I'm still working on the images, but it looks good from here on that. Pleasure working with you. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Right then. I'm going to be gone tomorrow. As far as I am concerned, everything is done. I'll wait until the 4th my time (it's the 2nd my time now) to make sure nothing blows up, since this is still a very new article. Assuming nothing happens, this is ready for promotion then. Again, it's been a pleasure working with you. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Things are moving nicely, with most of the issues resolved or resolving but a new problem has surfaced, which I detailed at 2b. Hopefully it's not that hard to fix. That and the addition of Kuring (1a) are the only outstanding issues you can work on. I'm still working on the images, but it looks good from here on that. Pleasure working with you. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
PROMOTED - I feel that this meets the requirements, and that enough time has passed with no objections raised that nothing is going to explode. Congrats, and please keep me in mind for any further GAN needs, cup or no cup. It's been a pleasure. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)