Talk:Cyclone Bejisa
 | Cyclone Bejisa 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: April 28, 2014. (Reviewed version). |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Cyclone Bejisa/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 20:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi! I'll take this article for review, and should have my full comments up by later today. Dana boomer (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
- Lead, "With favorable conditions around," Is this a common phrasing in meteorology?
- I didn't think it was that weird, but I removed "around" for better flow. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Lead, "communne" Should this be "commune" or is it a non-American English spelling I'm not familiar with?
- Yea, misspelled, sorry. I added a link too. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- MH, "before slightly weakening before impacting" - repetitive "before"s
- Fixed. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Reunion, "The rains caused rivers to rise, causing flooding." - repetitive caused/causing
- Changed one. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- I realize this is only a few months later, but has there been any follow-up to the compensation of farmers? The article ends on a bit of a questioning note, stating that farmers were skeptical they were going to be compensated, and it would be a more satisfactory ending to be able to say whether the farmers had been compensated or not.
- I'll check. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Alright, I got proof that the farmers were indeed compensated. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Ref #48 (Bejisa : Une facture de 25 millions) - Why is the title repeated twice?
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- One minor referencing issue and a few prose niggles; otherwise, a nice article. I am placing the review on hold to allow the above comments to be addressed. Dana boomer (talk) 23:05, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, been pretty busy the past few days. I'll check tomorrow about the farmers. Thanks for the review :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- No problem! Everything looks good now. I addressed the one minor issue with the references (a title had accidentally been entered in the url field, so I found what I think is the proper URL, but please double check my work!). Other than that, your changes look great, and so I'm going to go ahead and pass the article. Dana boomer (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, been pretty busy the past few days. I'll check tomorrow about the farmers. Thanks for the review :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- One minor referencing issue and a few prose niggles; otherwise, a nice article. I am placing the review on hold to allow the above comments to be addressed. Dana boomer (talk) 23:05, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cyclone Bejisa. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140107150658/http://www.meteo.fr/temps/domtom/La_Reunion/webcmrs9.0/anglais/activiteope/bulletins/zcit/ZCITA_201401071139.pdf to http://www.meteo.fr/temps/domtom/La_Reunion/webcmrs9.0/anglais/activiteope/bulletins/zcit/ZCITA_201401071139.pdf
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) 00:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)