Talk:Surface weather observation/GA

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of March 26, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Data reported should be in prose

2. Factually accurate?: Pass

3. Broad in coverage?: Needs a general expansion

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images?: No need for the airport runway, could use a picture of an ASOS station

Needs some work.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 20:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also no need for the temperature map. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 20:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha. I knew someone wasn't going to like the bullet point idea. Keep in mind this was suggested by a fellow editor of this article, which I checked out within the manual of style. It turns out Wikipedia:LAYOUT#Body_sections allows for bullet points in an article if the alternative is a lot of gray text. As for expansion, which section/s do you think need it? Took care of the ASOS image. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that wouldn't look to great in prose. I suggest expanding pretty much everything, especially sections with main/see also links. I would help some more, but I'm tracking the storms in Missouri. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 23:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Today is the last day I can edit this article before April 5, and chances are that I've done most of the edits I can do today. If there are lingering issues, the article will either need to be failed or placed on hold until after April 5. I did not anticipate the article would take so long to get reviewed (though I am glad that it has been reviewed). Either way, please let us know what still needs to be done in order to get this article to GA class, if it is still not ready. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see a reference for disemenation through Weather Underground and the last few "Data reported" items. I think they were added by an anon at one point. When you rectify these issues, I will pass the article. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think the last 3 elements need much of a description? Measurement of precipitation is merely done for meteorological and climatological concerns. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think if it did need an explanation it is already there. However, you do nnot need to remove the current descriptions. I am now passing the article. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 02:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of April 15, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass

2. Factually accurate?: Pass

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images?: Pass

Another great article great doctor! If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 02:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]