Talk:Hurricane Cleo (1958)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Hurricane Cleo (1958) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles 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 reassessment.
February 27, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

	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.
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.

Wrong Cleo - the 1958 Cleo, which hit Category 5, did not affect land at all...

You're right, this was pulled word-for-word from my article about Catastrophic Florida Hurricanes. That article is about the 1964 Cleo.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:25, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Todo

I'm not sure about the importance. Some things to do would be fix some Wikilinks (dates should always be Wikilinked due to user preferences), shorten the lede a bit (since the article is so short, no need for it to go into so much detail; on the other hand, it'd be nice if you specified what the other two storms were in the second sentence), integrate the two quotes (they're not really "quotes", and they're in the PD), and avoid the usage of calling the storm "Cleo" - while occasionally it is fine, remember that the system was a hurricane, not a person. ;) ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The usage of quotes in the article is a bit awkward, such as "large cyclonic circulation", or as a "severe storm,". The quotes should be re-written so it flows better with the prose. Also, the lede is a bit long, and could probably be trimmed a bit.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Perhaps put the Cat. 5 hurricanes template at the right of the second section.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Overall a good article. Good work. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)