# Talk:Hurricane Dean (1989)

It's a high start, but there's still a little to be done for B class. First, the whole thing needs another look through. In a lot of places, the wording doesn't make sense. The unit of knots should not be used; the Imperial and Metric equivalents should be. The storm history jumps a bit. Write it as if you're drawing a line. For example.

Dean's forward speed increased to 15 kts as the trough to the west of the storm deepened. The eastern half of the eyewall brushed Bermuda as Dean reached a category 2 status.
That could probably be smoother. The sentence after that is a fragment. Throughout the storm history, dates and locations would be good. The first paragraph of the preparations should be trimmed a bit, or split into two paragraphs. The impact should be in a clear order; one paragraph for Carib, one for Bermuda, and maybe one for North America (lumping US and Canada). Be sure add the rest of the categories and the button bar. All in all, not a bad start. Hurricanehink (talk) 14:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I changed the storms foward speed into Imparial and metric eq and fixed the fragement in the storm history. Storm05 14:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
And i split the first half of the preparations into two paragraphs and the US/Canadian impacts are already lumped togeather. Storm05 14:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I'd still like to see some more dates and location markings. For example, when did it make its closest approach to the Lesser Antilles, and how close was it? Also, Bermuda should be its own paragraph in the storm history. Are you sure there's no more effects in the Lesser Antilles? No rough surf? No erosion? How much rain did it cause? I just fixed a few small things, but the article needs another look-through. Please use a spell checker. Phrases like "Puetro Rico" should be in the article. It's getting there, but not quite B class. Could you also finish adding metric units to the article? Hurricanehink (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The tcr and the newspaper archive doesnt mention any more effects in the Lesser Antilles or mentions when it made its closest approach to the Lesser antillies. Storm05 14:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
There's other sources than the tcr and the newspaper. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but most of the other sources have info that is already in the article. Storm05 13:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Try Reliefweb, they have some Caribbean info on Dean, and enough to justify its own section. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Dean (1989)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Canadian Paul 18:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
I will be reviewing this article in the near future, hopefully tomorrow. Canadian Paul 18:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Here it is:

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

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: 

At different points in the article, "Category X" hurricane is capitalized and at other points it is not. I'm not certain what the accepted standard is, but it should be consistent throughout the page.
Under "Preparations", second paragraph: "The watches for Martinique and Dominica were discontinued for the same reason." I feel that, given how specific you were with when the watch was discontinued for Guadeloupe, this sentence is distractingly uncontextualized. Could you be more specific as to when the watches were discontinued, even if it's just in relation to Guadeloupe (ie. The watches were later discontinue for...") Currently, it just sticks out a bit as a blunt sentence.
Same section, third paragraph. Is there any way you can cut down on the uses of the word "hurricane"? It's used six times in three sentences (including unavoidable uses in the name of an organization), which is repetitive and distracting.
Per WP:LEAD, the lead should contain information from all major sections of the article. Currently, there isn't anything substantial from the "Preparations" section.
Aside from that, everything looks good. To allow for these changes to be made I am placing the article on hold for a period of up to a week. I'm always open to discussion on any of the items, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 17:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I think I have done everything that you requested. Unfortunately, I cannot avoid use of the word "hurricane", since I have to say "hurricane watch", "hurricane warning", and "National Hurricane Center"; I am not allowed to simply say "watch" or "warning". Away, thank you for reviewing this article.--12george1 (talk) 19:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Excellent! I believe that this article now meets the GA standards and will be passing it as such. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Canadian Paul 05:08, 11 March 2011 (UTC)