Talk:Hurricane Marty (2003)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Hurricane Marty (2003) 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. | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 GA |
This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
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. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones. |
 |
This article has been assessed by editors of the WikiProject. |
[edit] Todo
Nice work so far. It's close to B class, but a few things are needed; a better pic for the infobox, damage totals if possible, fix typos, and more in the mainland. Because it came close to the U.S., did Marty do anything in California or Arizona? More everywhere, if possible, would be nice, but it's a good start. Hurricanehink 16:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- OK, very close now to B. All that's needed is a better infobox pic and another sentence or two for Mexico mainland and southwest U.S. Hurricanehink 19:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Close enough. Now you need what I said above. Hurricanehink 15:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
- A good reference for the article is the WMO Report, which I'm leaving a link here for future reference. I'll try to expand the article soon, but I always seem to forget where all the good links are. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 01:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
This article's been sitting here for a bit, so I'm gonna see if I can clean it up somewhat over the next couple days. --Coredesat 11:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA review
Read over this one carefully... well written, appears to conform to WP standards, other than the fact "Lack of retirement" is a weird section name. Is that one in the standards? —Rob (talk) 15:57, 21 July 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 it passed in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to update the access dates of the website sources. 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) 21:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
