Talk:Hurricane Beryl/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 22:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

This article is pretty well-written. However, there are a number of issues that I would like to address. This is my first GA Review BTW, so I would appreciate any feedback from experienced reviewers (such as Hurricane Noah), if they feel like I could use any tips. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 22:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Lead

• Rapid intensification took place and it quickly became a tropical storm at 00:00 UTC the next day. Change "it" to "the storm" or "the system." I don't mean to get picky here, but this can be confusing for some readers. It's always best to avoid ambiguity.
  •  Done
• when it regenerated into a subtropical storm, six days after its initial dissipation. A big issue here is the "initial dissipation" part. While this is true in a sense from a meteorological standpoint, Beryl did not fully dissipate here, and that part could confuse some of our readers, especially since the storm regenerated later on. I would change this part to "initial degeneration," or something similar.
  • Changed to “lost tropical characteristics”
• though effects were still felt across the eastern Caribbean. I would change add "its" to this phrase, for "though its effects". The sentence sounds a little awkward as it is right now.
  • Changed wording a bit
• Several areas in the region were recovering from the catastrophic impacts from Hurricanes Irma and Maria during the previous season. I'm probably starting to get a little picky here :P, but I feel that it would be even better if we emphasized that the recovery efforts had been ongoing for some time at the time Beryl happened. For that, I would change "were recovering" to "were still recovering".
  • Rewrote that entire last paragraph. How does it look? ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 18:04, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Looks good to me! LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Meteorological history

• Beryl was prone to very quick changes in intensity, I'm not going to make this one a requirement, but I would personally like a little more of an explanation here as to why. Especially if you're planning on taking this article to an FAC later one.
  • Already explained LightandDark2000, Due to its small size, Beryl was prone to... ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 22:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
    • I know that, but if you plan on taking this to an FAC in the future, you might want to expand upon why the small size of the storm makes it more prone to rapid changes in intensity. Anyway, I'm not going to let this get in the way of GA promotion, since this level of detail isn't mandated for GAs. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
      • @LightandDark2000: Has not been the same since Hurricane Andrew was the last time we had to go. I expanded on that. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 03:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
        • Beryl is already a GA, though. :) But I saw the changes. I polished it up a little. Well, the article is in even better shape now. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
• becoming the second earliest hurricane to form in the tropical Atlantic Ocean, Change "second earliest hurricane to form in the tropical Atlantic Ocean" to "second-earliest hurricane to form on record in the tropical Atlantic Ocean". It's important to make it clear that we don't have reliable records for the entire basin extending farther back than the satellite era. We should not presume that all of these records would hold up if we did have all of that information.
  •  Done
• As Beryl's remnants were located over the Bahamas, they became elongated and stretched several hundred miles. Sounds a little awkward here. I think that this phrase can be better reworded. Maybe change "and stretched several hundred miles" to "and stretched several hundred miles across".
  •  Done
• causing the subtropical cyclone to slow down drastically over the Gulf Stream. This incited thunderstorm formation, with an eye-like feature forming, surrounded by a "small donut ring" of convection. Explain why. Not everyone reading this article is familiar with why the Gulf Stream tends to strengthen storms.
  •  Done

Infobox and Impacts

• The article and the infobox currently has the total damage pegged at >$1 million.

I see a major issue here. I would upgrade the damage figure to ">$2 million". This is because the AON report provides an estimate of "millions," which means that the minimum figure has to be at least $2 million or higher. Also specify the type of currency in the Impacts section (2018 USD).

Striking out this part, per off-wiki discussion with Hurricane Noah. Apparently, "millions" can also refer to a range of values between 1,000,001 to 1,999,999. (Though that still doesn't sit well with me, but I am not the arbiter of this matter.) LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 22:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Preparations and Impacts

• The island remained on an Orange Warning until July 10 after the bulk of the rain passed due to a threat for isolated squally weather. Add a comma after "July 10" and after "bulk of the rain passed". The sentence reads like a run-on right now.
  •  Done
• Impact in Dominica was minimal, with no flooding reported. Change "Impact in Dominica was minimal" to "Impacts in Dominica were minimal". The impacts probably weren't singular.
  •  Done
• amid concerns that enhanced rainfall from Beryl or its remnants could lead to flash floods and mudslides, Link "flash floods" to flash flood.
  •  Done
• In addition, 19 communities were reported isolated due to flooding, 1,586 homes were damage, with four destroyed, and three bridges were damaged. Change the comma after "due to flooding" to a semicolon. The sentence currently has a comma-splice error as it is right now, as it can be divided into 2 separate, shorter sentences. This is an error that a lot of younger writers make, but I believe that you know how to handle this one. Also correct "were damage" to "were damaged". :P
  • @LightandDark2000: Oh, sorry. I used Google Translate for much of the text :P ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 18:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
    • LOL! Yeah, I've had issues with Google Translate before. But still, that little hiccup was kind of funny. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
• In San Cristóbal Province, the worst hit areas included the Municipality of Villa Altagracia, and other areas near the Haina River. A peak rainfall amount of 4.2 in (106 mm) was recorded. Change "the worst hit areas" to "the worst affected areas" or "the heaviest-hit areas". It sounds awkward as it is right now.
  •  Done
• The winds and downpours caused the diversion of two flights coming from South America to the Las Américas International Airport and the delay of the departure of several flights to the United States. Change "International Airport and the delay of" to "International Airport, as well as the delay of". It reads like a little like a run-on right now.
  •  Done
• along with a peak wind speed of 37 mph (60 km/h). Is this a sustained wind speed (1-min, I presume), a wind gust, or a wind speed measured by some other metric? Some clarification would be nice here. Modifying the phrase to have "a sustained peak wind speed" should suffice if it was a measurement of sustained winds.
  •  Done Gust. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 18:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
• Post-Tropical Storm Beryl had little impact on Canada, as it mainly affected marine areas with winds before gale-force. Two issues here. First, change "had little impact" to "had little impacts". Secondly, "with winds before gale-force" doesn't really make sense. I would like to see that phrase revised and clarified so that it does not sound ambiguous or confusing.
  •  Done

@Destroyeraa: These are all of the issues that I came up with during my read-though of the article. I corrected a number of minor grammar and mechanical errors so that you could focus on the issues that I've raised in this review. Overall, I feel that the article is pretty solid and close to meeting GA qualifications, but it still needs some finishing work to get there. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 22:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

@LightandDark2000: The WP bug is now fixed. Sorry for the reverting. ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 18:04, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

LOL. It's fine. :P Just need to work on addressing the MH bits, and then we should be good to go. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Final

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Great job. With the changes made to the article, I'm going to ✓ Pass this article. Congratulations on your 5th GA! LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 01:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)