Talk:Tropical Storm Humberto upgraded to hurricane status

Pre-review comments

@DannyS712: Question which the article leaves unanswered: Why are there no associated watches or warnings? I mean, I know the answer because I read about Humberto when he passed by Bahamas, but the reader might feel confused. Can you add some stuff about the hurricane's path and such? --SVTCobra 03:44, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

 Doing... --DannyS712 (talk) 03:45, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: Done paragraph added --DannyS712 (talk) 03:52, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: I uploaded File:09L 5day cone 15 Sep 2019 - 11PM EDT.png to Commons. It came out at the same time as the advisory from the NHC. If you feel it is useful for the article, add it. If you don't want it there, just reply 'no' and I'll continue the review. (I was too tired last night, sorry) Cheers, --SVTCobra 17:18, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: 'no' - no thanks, I think the top-down image is more interesting. --DannyS712 (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

We could have both. --SVTCobra 17:23, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@SVTCobra: added, thanks. --DannyS712 (talk) 17:30, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Review of revision 4513228 [Passed]

Revision 4513228 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 18:04, 16 September 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: No real comments as we discussed things before the review I don't see anywhere where it's common to italicize storm names, but that's just a style issue The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4513228 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 18:04, 16 September 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: No real comments as we discussed things before the review I don't see anywhere where it's common to italicize storm names, but that's just a style issue The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Clear

@SVTCobra: indeed, moving the clear moves the related news between the infobox and images, but in my opinion that's okay; the entire section fits there, and without it there is a lot of empty space. --DannyS712 (talk) 18:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Chalk it up to my OCD. Anyway, when you create a redirect, please request that it be protected. You can do that with {{Addeditprotection}} which I realize you had no way of knowing existed because it is not categorized. It even took me five minutes to find it and I knew it existed. But if not with this, find a way to notify an admin. Cheers, --SVTCobra 18:41, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Style

This has called to light another failing of the WN:SG which states to "Italicise names of publications and articles mentioned". This is categorically not commonly accepted style by any major style guide. Our {{source}} does a better job of getting the styling right. Articles should be in quotes not italicized. Publications should be italicized. I left the italics after I was reverted, but only because it is debatable whether an advisory from NHC is an article or a publication. I think they should be considered articles because they are short and frequent (several a day). --SVTCobra 19:00, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Article titles are usually quoted. I'm hoping to turn whatever energy I have left today toward review, or I'd further pursue this now. --Pi zero (talk) 19:10, 16 September 2019 (UTC)