Talk:Numerical weather prediction/GA2

GA review

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

Nominator: Feline Hymnic (talk · contribs) 11:18, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Wildfireupdateman (talk · contribs) 05:10, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

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, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline 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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

Copyvio: Earwig shows nothing much; first sentence does have the same wording as a blog source though.WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk)

Is there a reason why some models' abbreviations are used (ICON, BAM) while some are not (NAVGEM, NAEFS) in the Weather forecasting list? This isn't really a policy-based thing, just wondering.WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk)

Spotcheck

Source 4: Pass

Source 13: Pass

Source 22: Not sure where it talks about transmitting data to sfc stations, but rest of sentence is verified.

Source 28: Pass

Source 45: Passes the last sentence, although I feel maybe a couple more cites earlier in the paragraph would help a bit, as I don't see that content in the PDF linked unless I'm missing something.

Source 51: Pass

Source 62: Pass, although I don't see mention of the "two weeks" fact.

Source 73: Pass

Source 85: Pass (Primary source, but I don't see any issues with this)

The sentence about quirky local phenomena and mountain waves may need a cite.

Should CAMs (Convection allowing models) be mentioned somewhere, maybe in the parameterization sentence after the convection mention? They don't have a Wiki article but I believe they're pretty important.

ENIAC image and cumulus clouds don't have alt text, though AFAIK not required for GA.WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk)

@Feline Hymnic: - are you still interested in GAing this article? I've noticed you haven't edited onwiki for 2 weeks.