Talk:Tropical Storm Nicholas (2003)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hurricanes
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
Good articles Tropical Storm Nicholas (2003) (reviewed version) has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

[edit] Track map

Well, don't you think it is better to show the whole track of Nicholas instead of cutting off a bit of the extratropical part?????? The track in that part is quite interesting to show in full. That's what I think anyway. RaNdOm26 15:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Probably right.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, good luck with that. RaNdOm26 16:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Todo

Alright, I just finished redoing the article. What more is needed for B class? Hurricanehink (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Meh, provide a link for "wind shear" and "convection" in the intro. Also, I think the headings should be "Storm history", and "Impact, records and naming" (only the first letter is capitalised). LOL RaNdOm26 16:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
For Reference #21, you cannot cite Wikipedia as a source. Maybe have a look at WP:RS#Using Wikipedia as a source, though I am not sure how it really works. RaNdOm26 16:52, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm only showing where I got the ACE stuff. Mainly it's there to show the other ACE's. I tried linking ACE by storm, but I couldn't fit into the article, so I ref'd it. Most importantly, though, I linked the best track, which is where all the ACE stuff comes from. Hurricanehink (talk) 22:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA passed

As of 9 November 2006, per WP:WIAGA, this article passed for Good Article status. It's a nice small article with well-written crisp prose. It is also well-referenced and well-illustrated. Thank you for the editors for such a wonderful work. — Indon (reply) — 22:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)