Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Edith (1971)

Hurricane Edith (1971)[edit]

I finished this article a few weeks ago. It's well-written, factually accurate, comprehensive, neutral (IMO), stable (I've been the main editor, and Titoxd copyedited it, nothing else really), conforms to the correct style, 2 images, and good length. Comments? Hurricanehink (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. íslenskur fel lib ylur #12 _(samtal) 20:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very informative, and comprehensive details. Hello32020 21:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. CrazyC83 02:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rlevse 12:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well written, with good details. Must_WIN 01:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all of the above. A job well done. Cliff smith 04:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, with the obvious conflict of interest. Tito xd^(?!?) 07:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]