Jump to content

Talk:Typhoon Wipha (2007)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleTyphoon Wipha (2007) 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
August 18, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Todo

[edit]
  • Meteorological history needs to be completed.
  • Lead needs to be expanded.
  • More impact?

–Juliancolton | Talk 15:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead is too long now... –Juliancolton | Talk 17:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Before you ask: [1] & :P
Can't use the advisories until I get home, the school computers can't load them for some reason. I should be home around 1:45 (EST). Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:22, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Late response to JC) There's no more impact that I can find. Other than the MH, I believe this article is done. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Wipha (2007)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hello I will be reviewing your article very soon. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 21:41, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    you only have to fix one red link, but spelling is correct so I passed this category.
    B. MoS compliance:
    The lead of this article is too long. According to my count the character count in the body of the article is below 15,000 which means that the lead should be about 1 or 2 paragraphs per this.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources: Sources are cited regularly through the article, but three of the links are dead. See my comment below.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    Very reliable sources are cited in this article such as meteorological offices and reliable news agencies.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    This article covers all the major aspects required. It provides a history, impacts, preparations and the aftermath of the typhoon.
    B. Focused:
    The article provides detailed, quality information on the history, impacts, preparations and aftermath of the typhoon
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    The article is written from a neutral point of view.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    The article is stable.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    All images' copyright information is in order.
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    Images are appropriate and have good captioning.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Before this article can be passed you should work on cutting the lead down as it is supposed to provide a concise summary, but currently it is a little long. As soon as you fix this I will gladly look over your article again. Happy editing!

Reviewer: Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 22:54, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've made an effort to shorten and condense the lead. Juliancolton (talk) 00:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you want to cut out an entire portion of the lead, it's probably as short as it should be. Thanks for getting to this JC, I completely forgot about it :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:59, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have just re-reviewed your article and have found one more issue. Three of your reference links are dead, the dead links are reference 37, 40 and 31. These links need to be repaired or replaced if possible because they are needed to back up what is in those lines. Once they are fixed I believe that the article will qualify as a good article. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 05:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done what I could to replace the links, two of them no longer exist so some info was lost. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 11:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reviewer hasn't edited in some time, so it probably needs another reviewer to finish this up. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That I'll do myself, actually. Reviewing now. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 22:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any further issues aside from what was mentioned above, so I'll pass the article. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Typhoon Wipha (2007). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 07:38, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Typhoon Wipha (2007). 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) 01:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Typhoon_Wipha_(2007)&oldid=1211144785"