Talk:History of surface weather analysis

Latest comment: 3 months ago by Hurricane Noah in topic GAR notice
Good articleHistory of surface weather analysis has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 26, 2008Good article nomineeListed

Creation of article edit

This article was created at the behest of peer review for surface weather analysis. Thegreatdr 03:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    The writing is very good, and is very interesting
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    Good and accurite sources
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    A large amount of info for such a little-known about topic
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    Seems good
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:  
  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 captions):  
    Good images
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

This is a very good article, and meets all good article criteria. The prose is good, it is accurite and well sourced, stable, has a neutral point of view, is well illustrated by images, and is broad, but stays on-topic. I am happy to say that this article passes GA. Thank you for your work in improving this article to good article status. Juliancolton The storm still blows... 17:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of surface weather analysis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:06, 22 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of surface weather analysis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

GAR notice edit

The big issue I have with this article is that it needs a big update on everything concerning the last two decades. This article will be sent to GAR if this isn't resolved. Noah, AATalk 13:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

What are they? I was the surface analysis focal point at HPC/WPC for 17 years. Be specific. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Problem I have is I can't access materials on topics to check for relevance since they are paywalled. This will likely continue to lead to changes in the way surface analyses are created and displayed over the next several years This is one thing I know would need to be checked for potential updates since it has been several years. I would likely have to really dig into this to find the updates but there have been some since 2015 since that's almost 10 years ago. Noah, AATalk 00:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply