Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Gonzalo/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14:52, 16 July 2015 [1].
- Nominator(s): – Juliancolton | Talk 01:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've been working on this article on-and-off since the storm's formation last October, and after a recent final push to tie up loose ends and flesh out my research, I think it's among the finest tropical cyclone articles on the site. I hope you'll agree. – Juliancolton | Talk 01:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as the GA reviewer. I was very impressed with the prose while I was reviewing it, and it looks even better now with JC's finishing touches. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Very impressive, I only suggest at infobox, "Up to $400 million", remove "Up to".--Jarodalien (talk) 01:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
two official hurricane landfalls – is "official" needed? Are there sucha thing as an unofficial hurricane landfall?Gonzalo tracked northwestward as it intensified into a Category 4 major hurricane, the first in the Atlantic since Ophelia in 2011, by October 15. – having "by October 15" (referring to 2014) following "2011" is a bit jarring. It might be better in the middle of the sentence after "hurricane", but is it even needed at all? The timeframe is already set by "formed from a tropical wave on October 12" and "on October 16, Gonzalo peaked"."Barely a road" – quotations in the lead should have inline citations per MOS:LEADCITE (or rephrase into your own words)Guadeloupe – the first mention (in Preparations) should be linked rather than the second mention (in Impact and aftermath)The hurricane generated hurricane-force winds – repetition of "hurricane" should be avoidedNaturally, elevated weather stations observed the highest winds – is "Naturally" needed here, does it add anything?but the strong winds likely compromised the accuracy of the rain gauge – should probably be more explicit that the measurement is likely an underestimate, rather than just inaccurateCurrencies should be used consistently – some figures are marked as US$, others just use $ without specifying which dollarSpecifically, the article uses US$ when referring to the Caribbean, but when referring to Bermuda does not specify
0.25 mi (0.40 km) – 0.25 mi probably reads better as a quarter of a mile, and metres is a better unit to convert into for amounts under one kilometre- '
'Lowest pressure 940 mbar (hPa); 27.76 inHg – appears in the infobox, but is not in the article(and therefore unreferenced)
- Evad37 [talk] 12:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Should all be taken care of I think. Thanks for the review. – Juliancolton | Talk 17:07, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I've struck the resolved issues, just a couple left now - Evad37 [talk] 00:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe I've addressed the remaining issues here. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 06:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, Support on prose now - Evad37 [talk] 06:29, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Solid work all around JC. I've made some copyedits here and there so please double check to make sure everything is still in line. I also removed some redundant referencing that was covered by the TCR. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 06:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note -- image and source reviews? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Images review - All images used are well captioned and relevant to the topic. They are on Commons, and appropriately licensed. — Maile (talk) 20:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Sources - Sources used are mostly government institutions or mainstream media. A spot check with Duplication Detector does not show any close paraphrasing, copyvio or areas of concerns. AGF on non-English sources. — Maile (talk) 20:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Support as well-written, well-illustrated article. — Maile (talk) 20:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 14:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.