Talk:Project Stormfury

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Project Stormfury article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Project Stormfury 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 23, 2006 Good article nominee Listed June 13, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept Current Status: Good article

	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.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
	This article has been assessed by editors of the WikiProject.

[edit] Name

In many of the technical sources, Project Stormfury is often referred to as "Project STORMFURY"; that is, with the "Stormfury" in all capital letters. So, should we rename this to Project STORMFURY and change every mention of Stormfury to STORMFURY?--—Preceding unsigned comment added by Miss Madeline (talk • contribs)

No, I don't think so; though a redirect from the all-caps to here makes sense. From what I've seen of military operations the name tends to be capitalized Operation OVERLORD for example, though the common usage is "Operation Overlord" (both in general and on Wikipedia), and pick any other military operation you likely find a similar story. This seems to be the same thing, so lets follow the same logic and have a redirect from the All-caps to here.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA granted

Well descriptive and easy to follow. More information about the reception of the project SF would add to the article. Lincher 03:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Sweeps Review: Pass

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. 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 updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 04:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)