# Talk:Hurricane Sandra (2015)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Sandra (2015)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: KN2731 (talk · contribs) 09:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, this is my first GA review.


### Criteria
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
Article looks decent, only some minor issues listed below.
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Flow of the article is smooth and makes a good read.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
Inline citations all done properly. Lots of sources supporting the "Records" section.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Compact and detailed, but doesn't overload the reader with information.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
No biased views here, just facts.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
All satellite images are in the public domain and shouldn't cause any copyright issues.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Just some minor stuff below.


### Other issues
Lede

Link tropical depression in second sentence?
"evacuated some residents" – 180 residents is more than 15% of Boca Camichin's population, which is just under 1100 (source).
Meteorological history

"dissipated into a trough" – is "degenerated" more appropriate?
These should be easy to fix, after which I'll be more than ready to pass the article. ~ KN2731 {talk} 09:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Specified 180 residents in the lede rather than percentages. I went with "some" since 180 people is quite minor for a hurricane evacuation but using percentages can be misleading. Also used changed "dissipated" to "opened up" instead of "degenerated" simply to avoid repetition. Thanks for the review, KN2731! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 14:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane Sandra (2015). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160604151025/http://www.radioformula.com.mx/notas.asp?Idn=551035&idFC=2015 to http://www.radioformula.com.mx/notas.asp?Idn=551035&idFC=2015
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160611122233/http://www.omnia.com.mx/noticias/dejo-sandra-derrumbes-y-deslaves-en-carreteras-de-chihuahua/ to http://www.omnia.com.mx/noticias/dejo-sandra-derrumbes-y-deslaves-en-carreteras-de-chihuahua/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)