Talk:Tropical Storm Gladys (1991)/GA1

GA Review

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

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

Reviewer: Figfires (talk · contribs) 03:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.^[1]

Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);^[2]

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;^[3] and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

^[4]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

^[5]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.^[6]

Review

Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	Prose had only minor issues. There were no spelling mistakes. Prose only lacked words here and there.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	Complies with the manual of style on lead sections, layout, and words to watch	Pass

Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	A list of references is available at the bottom of the page... done correctly according to wiki policy	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	All sources cited are reliable. The majority appear to be reports from reputable agencies while several others are newspapers.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research was discovered in the article.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No copyright violations and plagiarism were found	Pass

Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The major aspects of this TS, including the met history and the impact, are present in the article.	Pass
(b) (focused)	Prose stays focused without going into extreme detail regarding individual events.	Pass

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The article does not have issues with neutrality	Pass

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
No edit wars in the history.	Pass

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All images have their fair use rationales/licenses.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	All images have captions that appropriately describe them and explain their relevance to the topic.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	This article was clearly ready for a GA review. Only issue I encountered was missing words here and there which I was able to quickly correct. Other than that, the article was great. I hereby promote this to GA. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 21:28, 20 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Discussion

^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Add topic

[1] Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.

[2] Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.

[3] This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.

[4] Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.

[5] Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

[6] The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]