Talk:Manzanita tornado/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Juliancolton (talk · contribs) 23:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article against the GA criteria. I'll read through and leave any comments or questions as I go along. It looks like a well-researched account of a rare event, and I don't anticipate reporting back with any major concerns.

• The Portland branch of the National Weather Service issued a record-breaking ten tornado warnings that morning - Not exactly clear that the record is only for this WFO.
• Not strictly necessary, but I think it would be useful to specify the time of the tornado in prose somewhere in the lead.
• Where is Oceanside (and how far) in relation to Manzanita?
• the October 14, 2016, event marked the first time since November 12, 1991, that more than one tornado touched down in a single day in Northwest Oregon. - Here, does "Northwest Oregon" strictly refer to the three counties identified in our article, or to the Portland WFO overall?
  • Source doesn't specify. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
• rendered several structures uninhabitable ... one home was rendered uninhabitable
• 2,500 people suffered power outages across Tillamook County. - Were all the outages in the county directly related to the tornado?
• It may be worth noting that despite the Red Cross shelter being opened, residents were told to shelter in place due to the expected additional bad weather.
• an extra ambulance was provided by Tillamook County to the city and volunteer firefighters were called in. - Little bit of a garden path sentence, as the first few times I read it I thought the ambulance was provided to the city and to the volunteer firefighters. Rewording might help improve flow.
• make quick repairs before and delaying clean-up efforts until October 16. - Having a very hard time parsing this.
  • I forgot to the sentence ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
• I don't usually associate "heavy machinery" with snow plows so you might need to cite the fact that snowplows were used.
• The last paragraph of the "Impact" section is pretty choppy. Any chance some of the sentences could be merged?

Sourcing looks good, spotcheck reveals good continuity with reference material but no close paraphrasing. Cited tweets were posted by a verified account of NWS Portland, so are considered reliable. Images are freely licensed, though could stand to be replaced by more illustrative photos if they ever become available. Placing the article on-hold for now so the above minor suggestions can be addressed. Nice work, and I look forward to listing this as a GA very soon! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the review JC! I believe I've corrected everything I could. Wasn't able to clarify the fourth bullet point, however. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Looks good to me. That isn't a huge issue - it would probably need to be clarified for a hypothetical FA run, but for GA, I'm satisfied. Nice work! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:26, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.