# Talk:Tropical Depression Five-E (2008)

Finish the MH! --Anhamirak 23:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Cut down on the info about the wave. Remember, the wave was not the same as the tropical cyclone, it just spawned it. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree. But that's about half the article. Potapych (talk) 17:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Yea, I removed three sentences that were a bit excessive in the article. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Depression Five-E (2008)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA. I made a few copy edits which you are free to revert if I changed the meaning. Everything looks good. There are just a few issues.

Comments

There are some dead links.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2008/ep05/ep052008.public.a.003.shtml?
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2008/ep05/ep052008.public.a.004.shtml?
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2008/ep05/ep052008.public.a.006.shtml?
What is "Hill of Ortega, Cabbage" as I have never heard of it?
Everything else looks good. Nicely written!
—Mattisse (Talk) 22:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
The "Hill of Ortega, Cabbage" was lost in translation. I also fixed those dead links. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2008/ep05/ep052008.public.a.006.shtml? which is still there. Glad you resolved the Cabbage thing!
—Mattisse (Talk) 23:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks hink, I got the last reference then :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
OK. —Mattisse (Talk) 00:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): Well written  b (MoS): Follows relevant MoS  

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): Well referenced  b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): Covers major aspects   b (focused): Remains focused on topic 

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

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: Stable 

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: Pass 

Congratulations. Good work!
—Mattisse (Talk) 00:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)