Talk:Tropical Storm Georgette (2010)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- You link to Baja California, Baja California peninsula, and Baja California Sur in the lede, but they all essentially refer to the same thing. I'd pick only one to link to avoid overlinking
  - Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "on September 20. On September 21" - could you find more engaging writing to avoid the same 12 out of 13 letters in a 26 letter passage?
  - I got to this. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The bit about Karl and the wave is potentially a bit confusing. Try rewording it so it can be more accessible to the layman
  - I tried to make it more clear. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:45, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Although the disturbance initially disorganized, the National Hurricane Center (NHC) gave this system a moderate chance of developing during the next two days." - you're missing a word. And why the the NHC give it a moderate chance of development?
  - Because shear was suppose to diminish. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Link tropical cyclogenesis somewhere, as well as atmospheric circulation and TS warning
  - Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
- "being upgraded to a tropical storm. Upon being upgraded" - redundancy
  - I fixed this. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Upon being upgraded, the storm was given the name Georgette by the NHC" - that's not actually true. It wasn't given the name Georgette until it was classified operationally. Also, when did it become a TS in the best track? You don't say it. Was it six hours after development? A year?
  - - 12 hours. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- You said "wind shear diminished the convection", but the infobox pic shows a good amount of convection. What gives? Did convection ever reform?
- It did reform at D-Mx the next day. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Officials warned the rural areas of heavy rain and high wind" - there are many rural areas of Mexico. Where?
  - BCP. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "A peak rainfall... fell" - redundancy
  - I think I addressed this. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Rainfall was also reported in 42 other sites" - that isn't backed up by the source
  - Removed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "52 shelters were opened in the Cajeme municipality" - don't start a sentence with a number
  - Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- So I don't get the order in preps and impact. Normally the first paragraph is about preps and the second about impact, but it's messy and interspersed. You mention evacuations/shelters in both of them, which IMO is unnecessary. I think it's by location, but the article isn't clear. You're also missing a key evacuation statistic from the TCR
  - It is by location and added the evacuation statistic has been added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Schools in Bahía Kino and coastal areas of the Hermosillo Municipality suspended classes as a precaution.[13] Classes resumed statewide on September 23" - so when were classes suspended? There is no context here. They might have been suspended for a week, or just a day.
  - Just one day, sadly. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- There is inconsistency whether inches or mm are used first
  - Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- You don't really mention any impact, other than water from a dam being released. Sure, there are some rainfall totals, but there aren't any indications of flooding, damaged crops or houses, closed roads. Were there any power outages? If there were none of these, then how does this article pass the notability criteria?
  - - They were indications of flooding per TCR and I added that in the article. They were no reports of crop damage (it affected a desert). They were not any road closers and power outages. The article passes the notability criteria by having non-NHC sources and impact as a TC. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Considering I saw a few things when I first started reviewing, I can see the article isn't ready, so I'm going to fail it. Feel free to get back to me when you address these comments. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]