This is my first Featured list candidate, so I will confess that I am unfamiliar with the style guidelines. I looked at a few current Featured Lists and corrected the mistakes that I noticed, so hopefully we will find it to be up to snuff. Before we begin, a disclosure: I don't know whether the second paragraph of the lead is appropriate. It was (more or less) like that when I came to the article, and I can re-write it if need be.
I have survived a couple FAs without major injury, and I think most of the reviewers can say the same, so let's give this a shot. PlasticupT/C 03:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Commas added to numbers over 1000. I don't like the convert template because it makes the edit box difficult for new users.
All instances of "operationally" are revised for clarity. There were several, and were all equally unclear.
The two redlinks. I'll see if I can find enough to make articles for them.
I think that the bold text of storm formations, upgrades, and landfalls is standard throughout Tropical Cyclone timelines and I would like to discuss it at the WikiProject before changing it. Feel free to contribute.
Can you point me to another FL with this level of bold text please? Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
As an FL director you know better than I do that there is no such article, but you also know that a lack of precedence is not an argument. I think that it is reasonable to allow the WikiProject have a full discussion on this matter. There is no sense in me making an arbitrary change now and then another change when the project develops a consensus. It might be prudent to revisit this particular issue in a couple days. PlasticupT/C 12:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, as FL director I am not commensurate as to the content and style of all 880 featured lists. Yes, by all means discuss this with the wikiproject but take heed, articles in breach of the WP:MOS will not be promoted. Simple as that. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Nor would I expect them to be. The wikiproject is very active; I expect that we shall have an alternative within a couple of days and implemented shortly thereafter. In the meantime I look forward to the continued improvements that always come with featured content reviews. PlasticupT/C 12:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I would also urge you to consider that you're using one method of identification for three different properties ("...all storm formations, upgrades, and landfalls are bolded...") and think about how accessible the emboldening really is when we also have WP:MOS#Colors ("...It is certainly desirable to use color as an aid for those who can see it, but the information should still be accessible without it....") and WP:BOLDTITLE#Bold title ("... Do not link words in the bold title..."). While not directly applicable here, the spirit of all this is that you can easily find another, more accessible and less aesthetically poor way of conveying this information. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't look like the wikiproject discussion is going to turn up a solution, so I have gone ahead and stripped the bold text from the main text. Let me know what you think. PlasticupT/C 15:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
There doesn't seem to be a lot of attention here. Would you mind if I asked the Tropical Cyclones WikiProject for some feedback here? I know it might look like canvasing (which is why I am asking here first) but the guys there are honest and thorough reviewers who wouldn't hesitate to shoot down a Tropical Cyclone nominee if they thought it wasn't ready. PlasticupT/C 22:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment Now that the boldings are removed, this sentence should be removed, as well: For convenience and clarity, all storm formations, upgrades, and landfalls are bolded in the timeline below. I'll take a look at the rest of the article later. JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone 13:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Good catch. Thanks, PlasticupT/C 13:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
References added, except for December 1, which doesn't need a reference because it just states the ending of the season. JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone 14:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I found something to cite the season end, just to be thorough. PlasticupT/C 14:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
my Comments have now been resolved so SupportJason Rees (talk) 16:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment - "The updates may be very significant, as was the case with an unnamed subtropical storm that went entirely unnoticed until the post-season review." Wouldn't it be better to say, "The updates in this case were very significant, as an unnamed subtropical storm that went entirely unnoticed was discovered during the post-season review."? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I like that a lot and have added something similar. PlasticupT/C 22:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Cool. Images and references check out. Support. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Support Images are all nice and free, article looks good. Well-referenced, seems to be MoS compliant, lead seems adequate. Meets all the FL criteria as far as I can see. Good job. Woody (talk) 21:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
CommentSupport Probably a little nit-picky, but replace the hyphens between the time and descriptions to an en dash. –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone 18:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank god for AWB. Replacements all done. PlasticupT/C 18:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to be frightfully dull but if your conversions are based on those used in the 2004 Atlantic hurricane season list, could you add the same footnote as there please? Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Took me a while to figure out what you meant, but I have added a note about it. PlasticupT/C 18:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.