Image[edit]

I’ve been wondering if I should change the current image and the image on the thumbnail to

Fay at peak intensity shortly before landfall.

, but I need consensus before I can change it. -Shift674-🌀contribs 22:29, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Fay (2020)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 08:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


This article is pretty well-written, though there are a handful of issues that need to be taken care of. These are mostly grammar and word choice issues. The sources have serious issues, however, but I took care of those (please see my comments on those, as these are serious infractions). LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 08:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
Meteorological history
Preparations
Impacts
Images
References

These are all of the issues that I have identified. The article is still needs to more work, but otherwise, it is pretty close to GA status. (I corrected a few of the listed issues to make things a little easier on you, while I was working on fixing the citation issues.) I have another midterm and an assignment due in the next couple of days, so I may not be able to get back to this until Wednesday or Thursday (April 7 or 8). LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 08:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, very good. Now, for the remaining issues (see below). LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 06:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Second Round

Lead
Impacts
Sources

@LightandDark2000: Should be everything. :) CodingCyclone! 🌀 📘 17:16, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are all of the remaining issues that I have found. They are mostly minor issues (such as grammar and wording issues) and should be easy to correct. This article is close to GA status; it just needs a little more work. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio check

Final

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Great job! Congratulations on getting this article to GA! LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:31, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Death toll[edit]

Should we say the death toll was 6-7, given how it’s possible there was a 7th death in Rhode Island, or no? 108.170.65.170 (talk) 19:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The TCR accounts for the other six deaths but doesn't mention this one at all, so I'd presume this fatality is unrelated to Fay. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 06:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]