Talk:Typhoon Caitlin/GA1
(Redirected from Talk:Typhoon Caitlin (1991)/GA1)
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Figfires in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Figfires (talk · contribs) 03:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Criteria
editGood Article Status - Review Criteria
A good article is—
- Well-written:
- (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
- (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
- Verifiable with no original research:
- (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
- (c) it contains no original research; and
- (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
- Broad in its coverage:
- (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
- (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. [4]
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: [5]
- (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
- (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]
Review
edit- Well-written:
- Verifiable with no original research:
- Broad in its coverage:
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
Notes | Result |
---|---|
There are no issues with neutrality in the article. | Pass |
Notes | Result |
---|---|
No edit wars to speak of. | Pass |
Result
editResult | Notes |
---|---|
Pass | This was a decent article when I first read through it. There were some grammatical mistakes present along with unclear/incomplete text in the lead statement. I fixed that up the best I could. Additionally, there was an issue in the MH regarding a statement in the first paragraph. I put the article on hold to allow for corrections. Since that issue has been fixed, I now feel this article is worthy of Good Article status. Good job and keep writing. FigfiresSend me a message! 01:46, 19 October 2018 (UTC) |
Discussion
edit- Only issue I see in the MH... In the first paragraph of the MH, it is stated "and although the deep convection was initially displaced to the west of the deep convection". FigfiresSend me a message! 03:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- In the impacts, is there a total for damages caused in the Philippines from flooding/landslides or is that not available? FigfiresSend me a message! 03:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- No because the storm isn't listed in the NDCC database so any possible damage estimate would be from newspapers, which are hit and miss at best. Thanks for the review. YE Pacific Hurricane 19:33, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
- ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
- ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
- ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
- ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
- ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.