Talk:Cyclone Waka/GA1

(Redirected from Talk:Severe Tropical Cyclone Waka/GA1)
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Hylian Auree in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ★ Auree (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC) Reply

Review completed by ★ Auree (talk)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
GA toolbox
Reviewing
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    Lede - There are a few issues that need fixing here.
    ... was one of the worst tropical cyclones to ever impact the South Pacific kingdom of Tonga. - Worst, how? This could imply several things. Was it deadly or damaging? In this case, it'd be better to go with something more specific such as "costliest", "devastating" or "catastrophic".
    Forming out of a near-equatorial trough in mid-December 2001, the precursor to Waka initially struggled to gain strength - Although I understand what you mean, this part could be misleading. Did the precursor to Waka form out of the trough, or was the trough the precursor to Waka?
    The storm gradually was able... - Doesn't read all too well.
    ... and 104.2 million paʻanga ($51.3 million USD) was wrought in damage. - Technically nothing wrong here, but consider using the currency sign (T$) instead.
    Hundreds of structures were destroyed and much of the nation's agriculture was destroyed. - A bit repetitive; could be altered a bit.
    Overall, the prose is a little verbose and clunky; try to smoothen it out a bit.
    Meteorological history - Pretty solid; no more than a handful of minor issues.
    ... twin equatorial monsoonal troughs - You link monsoon and trough separately, but an article on monsoon troughs exists, which I assume are the type of troughs in question here.
    • You link sea surface temperature twice, though under different terms (initially "warm waters" and later on the actual term "sea surface temperatures"), which could be a bit confusing. I'd suggest using "warm sea surface temperatures" or something along those lines instead, and de-linking the second one.
    Later that day, the cyclone attained its peak intensity as a Category 4 severe tropical cyclone with winds of 185 km/h (115 km/h) and a barometric pressure of 930 mbar (hPa; 27.46 inHg).[2] The JTWC assessed the storm to have attained similar one-minute sustained winds upon peaking. - I'm guessing the first assessment was done by the Fiji Meteorological Service, and that the winds measured by the agency were one-minuted sustained as well? Perhaps you could clarify a bit.
    Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Wikify eye.
    Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Gradual weakening took place over the following few days and the system retained gale-force winds through January 5; however, its pressure continued to decrease. - This sentence is sort of bloated and doesn't read too well.
    Reworded Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    • I fixed some minor issues, but it could still use a copy-edit.
    Preparations and impact - Same as MH, basically.
    Many residents on the small island of Niuafo'ou, about 35 km2 (13.5 mi2) in size, evacuated to other islands prior to Waka's arrival. - Why do you mention its size? Did it have any effect on local preparations or impact?
    Since small can be a relative term, I thought it best to give an actual size for the island as well. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Well, then don't mention anything about its size altogether. After all, that's what the main article on the island is for. ★ Auree (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    According to local reports, nearly every tree in Neiafu had been downed by high winds and "It is like the island [was] sandblasted." - The inline quotation is kind of terse and loose.
    Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    ... about 200 homes in the city were severely damaged or desroyed. - Typo. Also, it'd be better if you switched around "severely damaged" and "destroyed".
    When reading that sentence, severely damaged or destroyed sounds better than destroyed or severely damaged.Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Now that I read it again, I agree. ★ Auree (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    Six months after the storm, the bat population in Vava'u was still only 20% the pre-storm level. - Missing a word there. ;)
    Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
    • Also needs a copy-edited for optimal punctuation.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    No problems here.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    Very thorough and informative.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    Yep.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
    All good.
  6. 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 captionsy):  
    All images are PD.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
  8. Comments:
  • Please link storm name to article here and here.
Linked Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • The whole article needs a quick rescan.
  • You mention Waka passed directly over Vava'u in both the lede and the Impact and preps section; however, it isn't mentioned in the MH, which is supposed to cover any major aspects regarding its storm path.
Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:31, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

In all, it's a solid article; I'll pass it once all the issues have been addressed. ★ Auree (talk) 02:20, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've addressed all the main comments you left. Is there anything else specific with the prose that needs fixing? Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's looking much better now. A few problems left I see...
The storm attained its peak intensity as a Category 4 severe tropical cyclone on December 31 with winds of 185 km/h (115 mph); it passed directly over Vava'u at this strength. - Kind of an awkward structure here, especially for a lede sentence.
... the system entered a region which favored - Clause should be restrictive.
And more minor issues such as these; however, I feel it does meet GA now. Fix these last issues and I'll pass it. :) ★ Auree (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply
Problems met. Passing – good work. ★ Auree (talk) 19:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC)Reply