This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…it was twice offered up for FA-class by other editors, and having never accomplished a featured article and only participated in one FAR, I am looking for feedback as to how to fix this article into FA quality before I proceed in trying to improve it to that level.
Thanks, Ks0stm (T•C•G) 19:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is really close to FA-quality. Seems to have improved significantly since the last FAC. My only suggestion would to make absolutely certain that all the valid concerns mentioned during both FACs have been addressed. Also, I noticed that many inline cites are duplicated; you should use ref=name to group those. Pressure gradient is a disambig that needs to be fixed. --mav (Urgent FACs/FARs/PRs) 00:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I took care of the disambiguation link. About the concerns over prose in the second FAC, does this article still need a copyedit? I've never been a great prose writer myself, so this is an area beyond my expertise. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 18:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ruhrfisch comments: I will review this as I would at FAC, here are some suggestions for improvement.
- First some general comments - there are several places where units need to be converted to metric - for example in the lead there is ... causing wind and water damage, and dumping six inches of snow in central and eastern Massachusetts. or in the Long Grove tornado section there is Two of the victims, the parents of a 13-year old girl, were killed when the tornado picked the three of them out of their home and threw them 400 feet.[57] as well as One mobile home was thrown 100 yards from its foundation.[51] (This is not a complete list)
- Another thing that FAC requires is that all the little details are taken care of and things to be done consistently. So for example in the Spanish Fort area tornado in the table, miles per hour is spelled out Winds within the tornado were estimated at 95 to 100 miles per hour (153 to 160 km/h). but the rest of the article uses mph (for example the very mext tornado in the table The maximum width of the tornado was estimated to be 100 yd (91 m) with winds up to 90 mph (140 km/h).
- This might be a WikiProject guideline, but the WP:MOS#Units_of_measurement says In the main text, give the main units as words and use unit symbols or abbreviations for conversions in round brackets....However, where there is consensus to do so, the main units may also be abbreviated in the main text after the first occurrence.
- Is it "mid-west" as in This squall line continued to renew its energy as it passed through the mid-west, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and New England,... or "Midwest" as in The warning included parts of the Deep South, Ohio Valley, Midwest, and Appalachians.
- The article covers a lot of geography and there are places where it would help to be clearer which state is being discussed. For example in the Storm development section, the paragraph on the Lone Grove tornado never says it was in Oklahoma. I know it says the state in the lead, but here the previous paragraph ends with tornados in three states In addition to the five Oklahoma tornadoes, three tornadoes struck northern sections of Texas and one tornado hit Springfield, Missouri.[6][7] then follows this with the somewhat vague paragraph starting The most significant tornado, eventually called the Lone Grove Tornado, first touched down in southeast Jefferson County at 6:48 pm CST (00:48 UTC) near the Red River.[5]
- The external link checker shows several dead links.
- The language is not bad, but it tends to be a little choppy and it doesn't flow as well as it could in many places. I will pick one paragraph as an example.
- The tornado left devastation across a swath over a half-mile wide. Buildings were reportedly thrown off their slabs and the local chamber of commerce office was flattened. A furniture store and two mobile home parks were also destroyed.[45] One of the mobile home parks contained 40 homes, leaving close to 100 people homeless.[49][50] One mobile home was thrown 100 yards from its foundation.[51] The glass lobby of the UPS building was shattered.[45][49] A total of 114 residences were destroyed by the tornado in Lone Grove.[52]
- First sentence - needs conversion factor for half-mile. Also the length of the tornado's path (35 miles (56 km)) is given two paragraphs previously. These two pieces of information seem to me like they belong together. For the rest of the paragraph - it is often useful to go from the general to the specific. If that were the case, I think I would start with the 114 residences destroyed in Lone Grove, then give specifics. The next item could probably be the two mobile home parks destroyed, one of which contained 40 homes and left 100 homeless. Then the mobile home being thrown 100 yards (spell out and conversion needed) could be next (most specific). A nice transition to the next part might be the sentence Buildings were reportedly thrown off their slabs and the local chamber of commerce office was flattened. I might say something like "Throughout Lone Grove buildings were thrown off their slabs; the local chamber of commerce office was flattened. instead. Then the commercial damage could follow - I think I would take the furniture store out of the mobile home parks sentence and put it with other commerical items.
- Another place where this approcach would help is in the Aftermath section - part of this is also providing context for the reader - see WP:PCR. So for example in this part of the section A concert featuring Chris Cagle and other local musicians at Heritage Hall in Ardmore raised over $18,000 to benefit Carter County tornado victims.[133][134] Another concert set up by the Salvation Army raised $2,300 more for victims.[134] The Department of Homeland Security offered to assist with the reconstruction of homes and businesses and to support those who were left homeless. President Barack Obama passed along his condolences and best wishes to the victims of the tornado.[127] the first sentence's sources date it to March 13-16, well after the tornado. The second sentence is March 16. The next two sentences are February 11. I can see grouping the federal repsonses together in a paragraph, or doing it chronologically, but this way makes little sense to me.
- When I looked at current ref 127 to see the date, I read it. The article says tornado warnings were issued 35 minutes ahead of the tornado in Lone Grove and that people did not seek shleter, perhaps why at least some of the fatalities occurred. I did not see this in the article, but it seems worthy of inclusion.
- I would get a copyedit - there are volunteers at WP:PR/V that will help with this.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I am copying your comments to the article's talk page so I can use it as a to-do list, of sorts. Thanks for the check. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 14:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]