Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tropical Storm Barry (2007)

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 00:50, 16 April 2008.

Tropical Storm Barry (2007)

Self-nom. I'm nominating this article for featured article because I believe this is a great example of a tropical cyclone article on a weak, recent storm. It passed GA, and a few other editors commented how good they thought it was. So, feel free to rip it apart. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

~~Is Unisys really the publisher of http://www.weather.unisys.com/hurricane/archive/07060200? Wouldn't it be the Ruskin FL Nattional Weather Service?~~
~~Need to italicise Miami Herald. Same for any other newspapers or magazines.~~
http://bonesville.net/ is a local newspaper? Not quite sure who is behind them.

All the links check out with the link checker tool. The spanish language site said it timed out with the tools, but it worked fine with I clicked it (Not that I could read it, but...) Ealdgyth - Talk 22:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch with the Unisys one. I removed Unisys, but since Ruskin, FL NWS was the author, there's no need for a publisher. Italics were added. Bonesville.net seems to be an OK source, as 10 other articles use it for the North Carolina area. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Repetition avoidable? "Heavy surf killed one surfer ..." (Heavy seas?)

Just a quick note, surfers are in the surf, so yes, the surf/waves killed him, not the sea itself. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"though deep convection continued to organize near the center"—although is preferred in formal text, according to my US dictionary. I'm uncomfortable with an intransitive "organize" here; isn't there a better term you guys use? Even "take root" or "develop"?
"50—60 feet (15—18 m)"—No, en dashes for ranges please, not em dashes. See MOS. TONY (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I avoided a trip to the Department of Redundancy Department. I switched it to "although", and I changed the em dash to en dash (thanks, I didn't know that). Regarding "organize", are you opposed to the term in general, or just in the form of "to organize"? The National Hurricane Center regularly uses the word to describe strengthening cyclones, including the phrase "to organize", and it also uses "organization" as in "better organization", as well as "organized" and "disorganized". ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Conditional~~ Support It looks good for the most part, but I do see some very minor issues:
In the first sentence, I usually like "which" instead of "that".
2 of the 3 last sentences in the lead start in "The rainfall". See if you can find slightly different wording.
Operationally it was not classified until eleven hours later.[3] A comma after "operationally" would make that sentence easier to read.
The precursor system dropped heavy rainfall across western Cuba, peaking at 12.0 inches (305 mm) in Sancti Spíritus Province.[3] 12.0 inches? Wouldn't 12 inches be the same thing?
Wet roads caused several traffic snarls across the state; in both Brevard and Volusia counties, a motorist was killed from an accident. Something about "Snarls" just doesn't sound like an encyclopediac word to me.
Rough seas off of Cape Fear left a sailboat of three people requiring rescue from the Coast Guard.[33] I would like to see "a sailboat containing three people..." Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Per English relative clauses#That and which, that is preferred in formal English writing, so I opt to keep that. I got the rest of the issues, except for the last one, which I prefer to keep at "Rough seas", since this is the first time the seas were talked about in the section. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok, looks good. I changed to support. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 02:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Appears comprehensive, well-organize and well-written. Karanacs (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. One of WPTC's best Tropical storm article, fully deserves FA.^Mitch 32 ^contribs 00:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support—hinks, the writing is gradually improving. Good to see. TONY (talk) 14:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.