Talk:Tropical Storm Mindy (2003)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Tropical Storm Mindy (2003) was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
October 30, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
January 13, 2008 Featured topic candidate Promoted
April 17, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept
September 12, 2010 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article


People may disagree with this, but I'm putting Mindy at Start class. It's just barely below B, only because I think that the Preparations are a little stubby. But I'm sure there's either a little more info out there, or you could combine it with the impact. I think that's all. Great job! íslenskur fellibylur #12 (samtal) 11:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I added a bit about Bermuda, but that's pretty much all that's out there with preparations. As a tropical cyclone, it threatened land very little. Hurricanehink (talk) 13:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I guess it's a B. But it might be a good idea to merge the sections. íslenskur fellibylur #12 (samtal) 21:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Maybe, but I think the preparations section is complete enough not to be a stub section. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Isn't Grand Turk part of Turks and Caicos Islands, not in the Bahamas. Maybe you should include that in the "Areas affected" section. RaNdOm26 08:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

GA Passed[edit]

A nice small article. Concise, well-referenced, has a crisp prose and broad enough to describe the event. The article does not have very specific technical jargons; thus easily be read by a non-specialist reader. Good job for the editors for such a wonderful work. — Indon (reply) — 09:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: Pass[edit]

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have added an article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:24, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


IDK, there's still a bunch of redundant/menial stuff here. It was a run-of-the-mill tropical storm, and wasn't notable at all. There was little real impact. Floods happen every day throughout the world. In the grand scheme of things, the storm will not be remembered. It was a passing news event, not really a notable storm by any means. Hurricanehink (talk) 03:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)