Talk:Typhoon Jelawat (2018)/GA1
Latest comment: 8 months ago by JayTee32 in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: JayTee32 (talk · contribs) 21:05, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi JCMLuis, I'd be happy to review this article, I just noticed it's been waiting on one for over a month now. I'll take a good look through Typhoon Jelawat in a bit. JayTee⛈️ 21:05, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- No. 1a has been addressed. For No. 2a, that is just how the JTWC titled the warning. I messed up on the dissipation date as I overlooked the differences between the JTWC's and JMA's track data, so I corrected the date among other things. There were no other Pineapple Expresses affecting California around early April 2018. So even if the source didn't mention Jelawat, the other sources state that the storm's remnants entered the Pineapple Express and therefore affected California. No. 4 has been addressed as well as No. 6b. luis 💬 23:58, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Seeing as all issues are addressed I feel comfortable passing the article. Good work and thank you for an easy review. JayTee⛈️ 00:33, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
Just a couple things..
| |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
| |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
| |
2b. 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). |
| |
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
| |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
| |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
| |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. |
| |
7. Overall assessment. |
|