Talk:Tropical Storm Chris (1988)
Latest comment: 11 years ago by MathewTownsend in topic GA Review
 | Tropical Storm Chris (1988) 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. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Be Wary of Longshore Encyclopedia of Hurricanes, etc., Book! edit
It had a whole host of errors relating to the Atlantic Basin, even claiming that the name Larry had been used by the year 2000 (it had not), and transporting a tropical cyclone back in time two months in 1893. If you want to check out several of its reviews (including an old one by myself), click here. Thegreatdr 18:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- Whoa... that one was rough! I wonder how our articles would fare in a WikiReader...? Titoxd(?!?) 02:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well consequely, some of our artiles have that Longshore Encyclopedia as a source. Storm05 14:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Chris (1988)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 14:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Will review shortly. MathewTownsend (talk) 14:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- review
I've made a few minor editors that you're free to change:[1] Otherwise, everything checks out. Good work!
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
- c. no original research:
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
- fair representation without bias:
- fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- no edit wars, etc:
- no edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass!
- Pass or Fail:
Pass! Congratulations. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)