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

Reviewer: Starstriker7^(Talk) 03:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'll take on this review. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 03:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 1 (clear/concise prose, the good grammers/spelling; lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, list stuff)

Lead

• " due to the proximity with land" --> due to its proximity to land?
  • I was leery of using "its", as it could also refer to National Hurricane Center. I changed it to "due to the cyclone's proximity". ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "redeveloped an area of thunderstorms" - the phrasing just seems kind of awkward. What is an "area" of thunderstorms?
  • It's just a broad term refering to more than one thunderstorm. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "locally heavy rainfall" - Do you need to "locally" part?
  • Locally means that it happened in sporadic locations. Without that, it would change the meaning and imply that heavy rainfall occurred everywhere. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "upper-level low" - What does this mean?
  • Added link. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• The lead refers to the a Hurricane Olaf, whereas the rest of the article refers to Olaf as a tropical storm.
  • Both are correct. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meterological History

• In the heading, decapitalize "History."
  • Oops. That's actually really weird it was capitalized. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "became a little better organized, while located" --> became more organized when it reached
  • Nice wording. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• What is a "wave axis"? If possible, explain (or wikilink, or a combo of the both) it.
  • Tropical wave is already linked, and I don't think "the axis of a wave" is that unusual of a term. Is it? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• "over the subsequent few days." --> over the next few days.
  • Why do you want that changed? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I guess I don't really know. It just sounds really blocky when its there. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:25, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• How exactly did the development of Tropical Storm Olaf stop Nora from further development? Can you explain this a bit more?
  • I emphasized it was the wind shear. Earlier it said that low wind shear allowed for intensification, so it should be logical that higher wind shear would stop that. Does that make sense, or should I explain it more? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:27, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Preparations and impact

• "locally heavy rainfall" is also here. Address this one as you did in the lead comment.
• "a tornado Sugar Land" - Add an "in".
  • K. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 2 (all info cited, inline cites linking to ref section; reliable sources cite challengeable info; NOR)

• I couldn't find any reference to the name Tropical Depression Fourteen-E in reference 1. Use reference 4 to cite the fact that the storm was named as such.
  • Nitpicky!!! :P Good catch, I got it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I couldn't find the 115 mph (185 km/h) statistic anywhere in reference 7.
  • Advisories used to use knots, but no one uses them in the public. It's a routine calculation to convert it from 100 knots to 115 mph. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:26, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Although the eye closed, reference 8 discusses a(n) (secondary?) eye that was still visible in the northwest. This probably warrants a mention.
  • Okeydoke. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• To say that thunderstorms were stripped from the center seems kinda original-researchy, based on my slightly sketchy understanding of the source...wouldn't it simpler to say that the storm had reached a region of stable and dry air and had begun to wind down?
  • IDK, I was trying to make the writing more engaging. I added the dry air bit, though. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Reference 15 talks about how, on midnight of day 7, the storm was downgraded to a tropical depression. Not doing this won't keep me from passing the article, but you could mention the midnight tidbit if you'd like.
  • The article does mention that it was downgraded to a tropical depression right after a sentence says "and by October 7 all of the deep convection had dissipated due to the additional influence of dry air." I don't think it's really needed. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Based on reference 18, is it worth mentioning that Nora was the only tropical depression of the five storms mentioned?
  • That reference also mentions Marty hitting as a TD. I don't think it's that needed. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 3 (covers all main aspects, stays focused w/o unnecessary detail)

Looks good in comparison with its countless GA peers.

Criterion 4 (no undue weight)

All good here.

Criterion 5 (stable)

It is stable indeed.

Criterion 6 (images tagged w/ copyright status (fair use rationales if necessary), images + captions relevant)

All clear.

Overall comments

Just some ref and prose issues, really. The ref issues I raised might be of my own folly (not being able to totally focus right now), so I apologize in advance if that is the case. Anyways, congratulations on your work on this article, Hurricanehink. I'm definitely honored to help out such a distinguished editor. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 04:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great review, thanks a lot! I responded to all of your concerns, so let me know if there is anything further you'd want me to do. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are all set here. I'll pass the article momentarily. Congratulations with this one! --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:30, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]