Talk:Cyclone Sina/GA1

Latest comment: 10 years ago by Dana boomer in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 20:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I'll take this article for review, and should have my full comments up by later today. Dana boomer (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    • Lead, "Sina's remnants subsequently maintained its south-eastwards track, before they" Goes from plural to singular, then back to plural.
    • Lead, "were evacuated from Fiji's outer island resorts to hotels on the mainland, including resorts located within Fiji's northern and eastern divisions." - Sentence is unclear - were the resorts located in the north and east the ones evacuated or the ones being evacuated to? I'm similarly confused by the corresponding sentence in the body of the article.
    • MH, " as it intensified and the upper level steering flow which resulted in" - Ungrammatical
    • MH, second paragraph - numerous islands/island groups that could stand to be linked. Check the rest of the article for possible place links too.
      • I think most of these are linked in the paragraph above.Jason Rees (talk) 00:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
    • Tonga, "alert for the Tongatapu, Haʻapai and Vavaʻu group of islands" and "the Tongatapu and Haʻapai group of islands" - Should these both be "groups of islands"?
    • Tonga, "after the roofs lost their iron." What does losing their iron mean?
    • Other island nations, "caused some damage to crops on Niue, the island's wharf," Why were there crops on the island's wharf?
      • I have removed the words on Niue to make it look a bit more like a list of damage.Jason Rees (talk) 00:37, 30 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
    • Other island nations, second paragraph, "warning(s)" is used four times in two sentences...gets a little repetitive.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    There are a few prose niggles that need to be worked out, so I am placing the review on hold. Dana boomer (talk) 02:10, 26 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
All sorted i think @Dana boomer:. Thanks for the review :).Jason Rees (talk) 00:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
OK, everything looks good, so I'm passing to GAN. Dana boomer (talk) 11:18, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply