Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2002 Atlantic hurricane season

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:34, 19 September 2008 [1].

2002 Atlantic hurricane season[edit]

Nominator(s): –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone


Here's another one. Based off a couple of my last FAs, I rewrote this, and I've put off FACing it long enough (maybe about a month :) ). Thanks for the comments and reviews, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image comments - I swear if I see another tropical storm or hurricane at FAC, I'll blow my brains out :P Anyhow, all images public domain (NOAA/NASA, etc.), properly tagged with author, license, and source. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC) Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs):[reply]

  • I fixed the Hurricane Gustav link—it led to the current Gustav instead of the 2002 storm of the same name.
  • "13 named storms, 8 hurricanes, 2.3 of Category 3 or higher"—Am I missing something? "2.3 of Category 3 or higher"?
  • "The same trough the spawned Tropical Storm Bertha sparked a tropical depression off the coast of South Carolina on August 5." Typo—"the"-->that.
  • "Ship reported discovered that the wave was accompanied by an area of low pressure." Which word is it, "discovered" or "reported"?
  • "The system then made an abrupt turn to the west-northwest, and remained steady in strength and course until landfall the next day, near Matagorda." "made an abrupt turn"--> abruptly turned. Just trying to keep the tenses the same in that paragraph.
  • "The disorganized storm moved westward then northward where it strengthened into Tropical Storm Hanna later that day." Just an opinion, but maybe a comma could be inserted somewhere to give the reader a short respite.
  • "The cyclone's strength continued to fluctuate, with it alternating between tropical depression and tropical storm several times." Fluctuating and alternating are about the same thing.
  • "This was due to the fact that many of the storms in the season such as Bertha, Cristobal, Edouard, Fay, Hanna, and Josephine were very short lived, and never reached hurricane status." "due to the fact that"-->because.
  • Reference 30 is missing an access date.

All in all, excellent article. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:38, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done with everything, thanks. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments :In the lead it says "However, the season was very active during September, and it ties 2007 for the record of the most number of storms forming in September, with eight." Can you please rewrite this as it is not correct as there were 9 Tropical Storms gaining Tropical Storm Status in September 2007 where as there were only 8 in 2002. However it is the record holder as far as i am aware of the most depressions in September with 9. Jason Rees (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]

I'm not sure of what you mean. The record is the number of tropical storms forming in the month of September, and both 2002 and 2007 had eight. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actully including Felix which gained Tropical Storm status during Spetember 07 which makes 07 have NINE Tropical storms named Jason Rees (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The record is not how many storms attained tropical storm status during the month; the record is how many formed during the month. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 17:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry my bad - ive just found a few bits that need things done to them

*Do we really need the ace description that include ace for storms that dont happen untill future seasons

  • do we really need the Ace of other storms at all really
  • if so to both points they then need referencing Jason Rees (talk) 18:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC) [reply]
  • Forecasts- Refrences need to be found for this bit
    • Not sure what you mean. There are references in the seasonal forecast section. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not for the following predictions NOAA - May 20 & August 8 CSU - May 31 & August 7 September& October 2
  • Date Wiki linking why is July 14th wikilinked and october 16th has not got a wikilink in the main table
  • same with the Landfall dates some are linked where as some arent

1)as Mentioned above the following predictions do not have a source - NOAA - May 20 & August 8 CSU - May 31 & August 7 September& October 2 2) July 14th is still wikilinked 3) you need a landfall date for the 1st landfall of edouard 4) Can you have a bit of consistency with the spelling out of the months - for some storms you have put Oct down and for others October and Aug for August That Should be it but i will take another look in the morning Jason Rees (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC) 5) 2)[reply]

Fixed up the table, but I'm still not sure what needs to be referenced. The entire seasonal forecasts section is referenced. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 23:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The table does look a lot better but its not all been fixed yet
Gustav has no 1st landfall date
July 14th is still wikilinked
some of the dats are formatted as for example 5 september and others are formatted as september 7 can you be consistant
Also the Seasonal Forecasts is not all referenced as you state as it is still lacking sources for the following forecasts NOAA - May, & August. CSU - May, August, September, October. Jason Rees (talk) 00:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • Any reason you link National Hurrican Center in ref 11 but not earlier or elsewhere?
  • Go ahead and exapnd the abbreviations for NWS and NOAA, at least on the first usage.
  • Shouldn't USA Today be USA Today? (work field in {{cite web}})
Otherwise sources look okay. Links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, thanks. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please review WP:ACCESSIBILITY. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done, though I'm not sure what exactly the problem is. Is the September section too big? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I already made the changes to images that breached accessibility and WP:MOS#Images, but I'm unsure if the colors in those charts conform for those with colorblindness. In general, I'm seeing accessibility issues on many hurricane FACs, so it would be good for y'all to review that guideline page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:49, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, they were thoroughly tested against all sorts of backgrounds, link styles, and with the help of color-blind people while they were being developed. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 03:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • You can have navboxes in the lead section, so what is wrong with accessibility? That link was the most important part of the article before it was taken out, and now it is hard to find among much less relevant articles. Also, it is now on par with List of retired Atlantic hurricane names which has very little to do with this article.Potapych (talk) 04:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It wasn't a Navbox; the closest I can compare it to is a one-article Seealso in the lead. If the argument is that List of storms in the 2002 Atlantic hurricane season is so essential to the article that an exceptional "See also" type div box had to be created to include it in the lead, then it's unclear why it isn't simply linked in the prose in the lead. It is not currently hard to find, as it's a main link at the top of the "Storms" section. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Essentially, because the plan is to make Timeline of the 2002 Atlantic hurricane season later, and have the navbox in the same style as the 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 hurricane seasons, which are all featured. We can comment out the templates for now, but it will probably be put in back again when the other article is created. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 20:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Ugh, I wish I hadn't looked, Titoxd :-) 2004 Atlantic hurricane season has a lot of issues, and needs cleanup on quite a number of issues. Anyway, since you all are devising a whole new sort of "See also", being used in the lead similar to a navigational template but somewhat different, can you all please hop over to WP:ACCESSIBILITY and inquire whether this works for users who use screen readers? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Would you prefer if the links were added to the big infoboxes? Some of those have multiple daughter articles, so I don't know what it will look like yet.Potapych (talk) 01:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak object, needs a mid-season outlooks subsection, like with 2006 AHS (linked above). I fixed the Gustav landfall issue and the "7 September issue" pointed out by Jason Rees, but the article is missing one or two paragraphs of updated mid-season projections by NOAA and Gray's CSU team. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added info and referenced table. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Something else that is wrong is that Klotzbach was not the principal author of the CSU forecasts in 2002. He took over Gray's job starting in 2006, and the prose seems like a copy-paste of a recent season in which the roles are reversed. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:53, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Got it, thanks. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:01, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • All right. I just ran into the MWR of the season, which may be somewhat useful (particularly the atmospheric conditions during the season), but I strike my object. Support. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 20:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It now looks a lot better so i support the article now Jason Rees (talk) 01:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jason, would you mind bolding your support so the FAC director doesn't miss it? Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's the kind of message I like to see on my watchlist :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
doneJason Rees (talk) 18:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on a few things that can be improved.

  • The lead is disjointed. The season dates are given twice, unnecessarily. I don't understand why 3 storms are listed in the first paragraph while 4 others are in the second paragraph; this doesn't seem to be separated categorically by meteorology versus impact. The second paragraph is particularly disjoined, jumping from arthur to gustav with no transition, then to october, back to september, on to november, and then back to september again; there's no chronological or categorical ordering here that I can follow. I tried working on the ordering of this paragraph but I think I may have just made it worse (will take another look later). This is the main problem by far that I have with the article.
    • I tried to reorganize the lead, with the first paragraph limited to meteorological aspects and the second limited to effects. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Do we need to mention Arthur by name there? Are there any other of the "several storms that affected land" that should be thrown in? — jdorje (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ok, I removed the mention of Arthur. I don't believe the lead should list all the storms, so I mentioned the notable ones and used that phrase to cover everything else. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Someone claimed La Nina was responsible for the inactive season. Oops!
  • Should there be anchors for the individual storms in the storms list section? 2005 AHS does that.
    • I personally don't believe it makes a difference, but I'll add them if you believe it's necessary. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Though I never liked the ugly storms table that 2005 AHS has at the top of the storms section, I am concerned that there's no handy list of links to all the individual storm articles. The paragraphs in the storms section try to vary up the ordering and thus the link comes at the beginning, middle, or end of different paragraphs; it might be better to have each paragraph consistently give the name and link right at the start despite the monotony. There is a link table at the bottom of the article but I don't think this is enough.
    • A previous season FAC of mine received a suggestion not to start every paragraph with the storm name and link, so I think it's better to vary the wording. The button bar at the bottom probably does suffice. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, some want consistency, others want variety. But I don't believe the box at the bottom is a sufficient set of links by itself. — jdorje (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

— jdorje (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. Replies are above. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notes: hurricane seasons are piped to a year link; see Wikipedia:MOSLINK#Dates. Y'all are again leaving out full publication dates on citations, which could make it hard to find sources if links change or go dead. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll work on the year links. Are the publication dates really needed? Most of the citations probably won't have them, anyway. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I checked a few citations and found all that I checked did have full dates. Also, some of the seasons say "in the xxxx season", while others are just piped to the year. Should be a quick fix. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/2002_Atlantic_hurricane_season&oldid=1078785222"