# Talk:Maximum sustained wind

I get the impression we need to add more information to this article before thinking of GA, but am at a loss as to what might be missing.  Any ideas?  Thegreatdr (talk) 22:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Per the GA review, more references were added.  Also, a new section was added after further thought.  The article has been submitted for GA once more.  Thegreatdr (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Maximum sustained wind/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
An attempt was made to resolve the issues raised by the previous reviewer, so the article has been renominated.  Thegreatdr (talk) 21:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

I read closely, and I can find nothing that could restrict the article from reaching GA status. Although the article is a little short, I'm surprised at how much information you found on the subject. It passes. Congrats! Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Well my problem with the article is that it opens with "maximum sustained wind associated with a tropical cyclone" and I came to this page trying to find out about "maximum sustained wind" having nothing to do with a tropical cyclone. I'm not sure an article on a term which seems to have general use when describing weather should just be about cyclones. If it really needs to be I guess there could be a disambiguation page but I like opening the article with a general definition of the term. Examples of typical wind-speeds might help. Then follow with the cyclone specific information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.119.217.183 (talk) 05:43, 16 May 2012 (UTC) 

Under the heading "Determination of value", there are a number of images under the sub-heading "Satellite Images of Selected Tropical Storms and Associated T-Number".  Below the images, there is the name of the storm and a T-Number such as "Hurricane Emily at T6.0".  There is no explanation what these T-Numbers are.  There is also no explanation on the linked page Tropical_cyclone_observation (but the same images are used there, so I include this comment on that page as well). SmilingBoy (talk) 11:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Explanation of T numbers is on the Dvorak technique page.  Thegreatdr (talk) 01:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Maximum sustained wind/CommentsTalk:Maximum sustained wind/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Last edited at 06:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC).
Substituted at 23:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Maximum sustained wind. 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/20120905133143/http://www.nwas.org/ej/pdf/2006-EJ4.pdf to http://www.nwas.org/ej/pdf/2006-EJ4.pdf
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) 00:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)