Talk:Hurricane Hector (2018)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Derpdadoodle (talk · contribs) 14:30, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comments

Hello. I would like to review Hurricane Hector (2018) and conclude if it is GA criteria. DerpieDerpie:D 14:39, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

???

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

other comments

English is on spot.
Great lead
confirm image captions, had some confusion with peak image
impact image possible?
that's all!

DerpieDerpie:D 16:22, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IN CONCLUSION

After I have seen plausible evidence of this article, I am proud to conclude that therefore, in my opinion, this article should be turned into a good article. DerpieDerpie:D 16:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]