Talk:Tropical Depression Nine (2000)/GA1

GA Review

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 17:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   In the second paragraph of the Storm history section, you say "with ship reported indicating the possibility". What?

   Simple grammar mistake; fixed. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 17:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

One little prose issue is all that stands between this article and GA, so I am putting the article on hold to allow time to address it :) Let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, everything looks good, so I'm passing the article. Nice job! Dana boomer (talk) 18:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy review! –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 18:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)