Cyclone Gwenda 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 February 2, 2010 Featured article candidate Not promoted September 26, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 13, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Cyclone Gwenda of the 1998–99 Australian region cyclone season was the most intense Australian tropical cyclone on record?
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Weather: Tropical / Southern Hemisphere Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by the Southern Hemisphere work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Australia Low‑importance Cyclone Gwenda is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Suggest change to lead sentence. Severe Tropical Cyclone Gwenda was the most intense Australian tropical cyclone on record, with a barometric pressure of 900 hPa (mbar). Its extremely high initial energy also caused it to weaken quickly once it made landfall in Western Austrlia 18 hours after its winds peaked. Then make a new paragraph, continue as it is. This way you have a paragraph that summarizes the article, and two more paragraphs that go into slightly greater depth for the lead.

Severe Tropical Cyclone Gwenda originated from a weak tropical disturbance that formed on 1 April --shouldn't this be originated in?

No because it did originate from a weak tropical disturbance.Jason Rees (talk) 17:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gwenda began to undergo a period of explosive intensification.[1] Its forward motion significantly decreased as it turned due south before...began to undergo? how about "began explosive intensification" or just "intensified" as a pipe link to explosive intensification. or how about Explosive intensification began ....

Although classified as the strongest known Australian cyclone by the Bureau of Meteorology, the operational intensity of the storm was slightly lower.

Lower than what?

Already suffering from the effects of Cyclone Vance two weeks earlier, which had destroyed or severely damaged 40% of the homes in Exmout... Residents of Western Australia already suffered from the effects of Cyclone Vance, which had struck the region two weeks earlier. In such areas as Exmout, Vance had destroyed or severely damaged 40 percent of the homes. Consequently, residents heeded warnings from...

In the paragraph that begins with Despite the cyclone's strength, its effects were relatively minor. But then you go right into discussing its strength. Port Hedland recorded winds up to .... So and so else recorded.... Rainfall exceeded in, well above average.

Then, new paragraph, despite these indicators of the cyclone's strength, its effects were relatively minor. Then, what were the effects and damages.

It seems to me that the prose is not ready for prime time. Just MHO. Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cyclone Gwenda/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Aaron north (talk) 05:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Y After a few minor updates, this was a pretty clear and easy pass. Aaron north (talk) 06:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]