Talk:Hurricane Cosme (2007)
 | Hurricane Cosme (2007) was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Survey
editWP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.
- Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?
- If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?
- Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?
At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time.
- Yes, I always look for feedback and suggestions on the articles I write. I know my writing may not be the best, so any help is appreciated. I don't do that much writing outside of Wikipedia, and if I do it's mostly for school-related projects. And yes, I really think that my writing has improved because of having to keep up with the standards of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Good Article Review
edit- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Great work on this, it is very comprehensive and this article passes the rest of the criteria additionally. Hello32020 (talk) 14:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • GAN review not found
- Result: Procedural delist following merge discussion Noah, AATalk 16:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Consensus to merge at Talk:2007_Pacific_hurricane_season#Proposed_merge_of_Hurricane_Cosme_(2007)_into_2007_Pacific_hurricane_season. Noah, AATalk 16:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)