Talk:Tropical Storm Dolly (2014)
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Cyclonebiskit in topic GA Review
 | Tropical Storm Dolly (2014) 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. Review: June 22, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Dolly (2014)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: CycloneIsaac (talk · contribs) 03:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, someone's gotta review one of these GANs.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 03:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- "At times, it was uncertain if a closed circulation truly existed due to conflicting data and the depression could have remained a trough until the afternoon of September 2." Comma needed between "data" and "and".
- A link to Tampico would be great.
- "More than 2 in (51 mm) of rain fell in Brownsville, causing street flooding." Two inches could be spelt out.
- "Accumulations of 4 to 8 in (100 to 200 mm) were common" Same here.
- 2014 Atlantic hurricane season is already linked in the infobox and the navbox, so the link in the see also section is redundant.
- First external link is redundant, as it is already referenced in the article.
Very simple things.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 02:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
- Made some of the minor tweaks. I disagree on the rainfall bit, numbers are always used for meteorological values. Removed one of the links from the see also, but kept Norbert for convenience. Thanks for the review! Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC)