Talk:Tropical Storm Bret (2011)

Tropical Storm Bret (2011) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 16, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Weather: Tropical / Atlantic Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Atlantic hurricane work group (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Bret (2011)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 00:56, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agreed to review this on IRC. I'll be giving the article a read-through and giving my review here. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:56, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the first sentence could be redone. It wasn't that persistent (particularly with Philippe later in the season), and it doesn't mention the location at all.
"It gradually strengthened in response to favorable upper-level conditions, remaining nearly stationary for a couple of days" - the layman might assume that the strengthening caused it to remain nearly stationary for a few days. Maybe you should mention its stationarity in the subsequent sentence, which is where you also mention steering currents.
You never mention the peak winds in the lede. How come?
"While moving little" - I think that's a poor way to start a sentence
"the storm supported moisture that caused beneficial rainfall over Bermuda." - that seems overtly and unnecessarily fancy. Try de-fancifying it
Where did the surface low form on 7/16? Some sort of distance to a location would be nice
"Although a circulation flow was initially lacking and surface" - at first, I read it like that (see Garden path sentence). I think the "lacking" here could be better worded
- Better, but (I just noticed), why not just circulation instead of "circulation flow"? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:06, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"At 2100 UTC the next day" - the previous sentence doesn't mention a date, so I would establish the date here. It's just my personal rule of thumbs, but I think it helps reduce confusion
"the cyclone very slowly drifted southward" - it reads odd to me, having the two adverbs before the verb. Are you opposed to a more standard wording of "cyclone drifted very slowly southward"?
"Satellite images ~~acquired~~ on July 18" - the "acquired" is weird here
"Despite the unfavorable conditions, Bret retained its intensity" - what intensity? You say that it weakened from its peak, so it's ambiguous what sort of intensity it maintained
- This is still ambiguous. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"however, intermittent bursts of convection reignited south of its exposed center, partially due to briefly variable upper winds" - I'm not quite sure what's being said there :P Try making it clearer/less wordy
Was the TS watch in Bahamas upgraded when Bret became a TS? If so, that should be established
"Outer rainbands spawned a waterspout that reportedly touched down on eastern Paradise Island" - "reportedly" is a word that you should avoid, as it implies doubt. If it was reported, say "that was reported to have touched down", or something.
"As Bret lifted out of the area, it drew in a large mass of dry air limiting chances of much-needed rain to subdue a large wildfire in the Okefenokee Swamp" - comma please in there!

All in all pretty good. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:20, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I discussed some of these issues with you offsite, and have addressed any remaining ones. Hopefully it looks better now. Auree ★ 01:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]