Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North Carolina hurricanes (1950–1979)

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

The list was promoted 20:07, 29 February 2008.

List of North Carolina hurricanes (1950-1979)[edit]

Self-nom. I published this earlier today, based off of several other featured hurricane lists. Regarding the lack of a top-right aligned image, I requested a track map of hurricanes that affected the state, as used in some other lists. Hope you like it :) ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved stuff from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
    • Never dared get involved with these incredibly detailed articles so forgive me if I cross over old ground. Good news is I might see things that other hurricane addicts may have missed! So...
    • "during the time period" wouldn't "during that time period" be better?
    • "(2008 USD)" in the lead - explain more fully what this means, or reword the damage estimate (maybe link to US $ page).
    • "Category 4 hurricane" is in the lead. Needs linking or explanation for non-experts.
    • Any reason why you don't use {{convert}} template which gives you free non-breaking spaces and perfect (!) conversion?
    • "damage is fairly minor" - tiny bit POV - minor or not minor (unless it's a quote).
    • Can the modern estimates of damage be cited (as they seem to be inflated versions of the reported damage at the time)? Or is that covered in each citation?
    • "extratropical remnants of" - not clear to non-experts. All subsequent uses seem to be linked.
    • "overall damage was limited" - limited to what? (I know, it sounds churlish, but surely all damage that has ever occurred had a limit?)
    • Stats section is aesthetically displeasing (to me, at least!). Table needs some work (perhaps just Storms as a heading, centrally aligned, and a footnote to explain what Storms means) and the graph could do with being "thumbed" and captioned accordingly.
    • Deadly storms isn't defined (although it's clear to me...) and none of the stats are referenced. Also, direct vs indirect isn't defined either.
  • So oppose for now until these are dealt with. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I love a good review from a non-hurricane addict :)
    • "during the time period" wouldn't "during that time period" be better? - good idea. I changed "the" to "that", though once the context was established, I left the others as "the".
    • (2008 USD) in the lead I changed to in 2008 USD, with a link to USD. Is that good?
    • Category 4 hurricane I linked it to a relevant article
    • damage is fairly minor - removed fairly
    • Can the modern estimates of damage be cited (as they seem to be inflated versions of the reported damage at the time)? - there's never been a problem with the other lists. The tropical cyclone Wikiproject uses this site.
    • extratropical remnants of - got it.
    • The monthly stats are the tables that are used in every other hurricane list article. I tweaked it a bit, but I would rather the format be uniform among the articles. Also, I explained the difference between direct and indirect deaths. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hey, thanks for responding and reacting so quickly.
    • Still think you should use the {{convert}} template - it provides a wiki-wide consistent approach to units, non-breaking spaces and conversion.
    • Just noticed New Holland, North Carolina doesn't have an article - a good opportunity to expand the Wikipedia by creating a stub?!
    • Is it just me or is there a dot at the bottom left hand corner of the graph?
    • Sort on number of deaths doesn't work correctly. Suggest you have a glimpse at the {{sort}} template which can probably help here!
  • That's about it for this round! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah yea, I forgot about the convert template. I got them. I was going to create an article on New Holland, but I added information and redirected it elsewhere (better to have a longer stub than to have two stubs). I found a way to fix the sorting. Yea, I think there's a dot on the bottom-left of the graph, though I have no idea why it's there, nor how to fix it (I admit, I'm not terribly computer savvy). That's it for this round :) ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - all of the dealbreaker comments have been admirably and quickly dealt with. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — I had the chance to meet Mr. Hudgins while I was a student at Virginia Tech. Excellent choice on sources. JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - good work! :-) Tompw (talk) (review) 20:49, 25 February 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_list_candidates/List_of_North_Carolina_hurricanes_(1950–1979)&oldid=1126719718"