Wikipedia:Peer review/Weather front/archive1

Weather front

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it is FA worthy, but I would like to get constructive critisism first. It went through an FAC two a couple of months ago, and I believe that I have addressed most if not all of the concerns.

Thanks, Juliancolton ^{(St. Patrick's day)} 15:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

SGGH

I suggest:

• citations in the lead
  • Just an aside, these are usually not required since the lead shouldn't contain anything that isn't expanded later on in the article... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
• the first image could be a tad larger for ease of reading
• caption of the warm front image could be expanded
• same with the occluded front
• the dry line image is very complicated, perhaps if it was larger or a simpler picture was located?
• tropical wave formation image is very small also
• the number of references are a little low for an article of this size, however I am aware that there are large sections of information cited to each reference, a larger bibliography would be ideal to verify information.

A good article, perhaps slightly reference light, and the bibliography could do with filling, however as it is well written and all the technical aspects are well done, I can't find too much to say, hope such commenets are helpful. SGGH ^speak! 17:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your comments. I'll work on those. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 17:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Julian, a lovely article, so I'll review definitely with FAC in mind...

• I think (!) the sentence in the first image caption is complete so it needs a full stop.
• Lead has "stratiform " without linking - could confuse non-experts.
• Just as a question, is the symbology used to depict fronts universal? I am fully aware of 1 to 3 (in the image) in my British reports but never seen the others... The article does seem a touch US-centric so I'm wondering if it's worth taking some time to consider a world view if it's significant?
• Not keen on the use of # in the image caption.
• "Warm fronts are at the leading edge of the temperature rise" - "edge of a temperature rise"?
• "half circles" - not wishing to nitpick but are they the same as semi-circles?
• Occluded front main article template should be capitalised for consistency across your use of {{main}}.
• Just a suggestion but perhaps it's worth generating a general weather map (or grabbing one) with examples of the warm/cold/occluded (etc) fronts and then, for each section, actually depicting what they look like on their own? Just an idea. Might be rubbish. Feel free to ignore...!
• Lee trough is redlinked. For full-on FAC I'd suggest you write a stub yourself.
• "Satellite view of the convection around a dry line. The Temperature in Fahrenheit at around 86 over the whole clear area but the dew point drop from the 60's, East of the brown line, to the 50', to its West." caption... surely Temperature is just temperature, but I'm not sure the rest of that sentence is English... "The temperature is around 86 Farenheit over the whole clear area but the dew point drops from the 60s, East of the brown line, to the 50's, to the West of the brown line." perhaps?
• "upper level jet splits" should be explained - first instance of jet in the article.
• "Hurricane Claudette (2003)," I'd pipe this to "Hurrican Claudette in 2003" and explain where it was geographically significant.
• " trowals/occlusions" - what's a trowal? This is the only time it's mentioned...
• "But not all fronts ..." - I would tend not to start a sentence with "But..."

That's all I have. I hope some of it is useful and please do shout at me when you go to FAC with the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for all of your very useful comments. I'll fix those, and I'll tell you when I plan to FAC it. Thanks again, Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 17:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and about the front symbology, I am pretty sure that they are universal, but I'll double check. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 17:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from thegreatdr

It is odd that I would have comments for this article, but I do. I have no idea where that dryline image came from. It doesn't use the right symbology, to start with. The image is a good example of a frontal boundary, but the boundary in the warm sector doesn't come close to fitting the dryline definition, which is an instantaneous drop of 25+F in dewpoint temperature. Why isn't the Bluestein definition still in the article (I hope I didn't remove it)? At the HPC, we'll use a broad 30F+ dewpoint change, since obs aren't concentrated in areas with drylines. Warm fronts are NOT at the leading of warming, they are on the backside of the warming (if that makes sense). In other words, warm fronts are positioned on the warm side of the temperature gradient, just like cold fronts are. I'm fairly sure I didn't have that wording in there when the article passed GA. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments by BirgitteSB

Sometimes the article forgets about the Southern Hemisphere (i.e. the lead). Some basic concepts probably need a little explanation here. For example, many times in the article the influences of "winds aloft" is discussed without ever explaining what wind aloft are. Try and give explanations without using a great deal of specialized terminology. (i.e. Warm fronts are at the leading edge of a homogeneous warm air mass, which is located on the equatorward edge of the gradient in isotherms, and lie within broader troughs of low pressure than cold fronts.) Also the flow of the whole article could be improved. You miss opportunities for easy transition by referring to concepts explained later in the article as if we already understand them. Sometimes this may be unavoidable, but focus on what you can do to make not rely on the latter concepts before they have been discussed.--BirgitteSB 20:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE close and archive the peer review, it's listed at FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)