Talk:1991 Pacific hurricane season: Difference between revisions
Jason Rees (talk | contribs) |
Jason Rees (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
Why were landfalls removed when WPTC agreed to bold landfalls in the season effects table [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tropical_cyclones/Archive_24#Season_effects_table...again|here]]? [[User:Yellow Evan|Y]][[User talk:Yellow Evan|E]] [[2011 PHS|<font color="#66666"><sup>''P''acific</sup></font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Yellow_Evan|<font color="#66666"><sup>''H''urricane</sup></font>]] 19:01, 27 May 2012 (UTC) |
Why were landfalls removed when WPTC agreed to bold landfalls in the season effects table [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tropical_cyclones/Archive_24#Season_effects_table...again|here]]? [[User:Yellow Evan|Y]][[User talk:Yellow Evan|E]] [[2011 PHS|<font color="#66666"><sup>''P''acific</sup></font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Yellow_Evan|<font color="#66666"><sup>''H''urricane</sup></font>]] 19:01, 27 May 2012 (UTC) |
||
:They should not be included since they are just a point and not significant, i also note that none of the decent other se charts have them.[[User:Jason Rees|Jason Rees]] ([[User talk:Jason Rees|talk]]) 19:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC) |
:They should not be included since they are just a point and not significant, i also note that none of the decent other se charts have them. I also note that only one person reckoned we should mention them.[[User:Jason Rees|Jason Rees]] ([[User talk:Jason Rees|talk]]) 19:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:12, 27 May 2012
1991 Pacific hurricane season 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. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
Todo
To whomever is working on this article, the section for Hurricane Fefa should probably be shorter. That's why there is a separate article. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
OK. Got it. juan andrés 04:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
- I have just rewritten the article from start to finish. I believe that I have resolved the concerns that were brought up in the GA review. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 23:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
GA review
- Well-written - Fail (few typos)
- Compelling prose - Fail - Here's a few quick examples. "and certainly could have been associated with a tropical wave." (certainly could have?) "the next day (dates should be written out) "when upper level shear increased as a strong anticyclone centered south of Baja California" (not a complete thought) "A well organized tropical wave over northern Africa that formed for the last three days, moved off on May 31 and the convection became disorganized while traveling westward across the tropical Atlantic." (very messy sentence)
- Logical structure - Weak pass - The lede is pretty short, and starts with the dull opener that should be avoided.
- Follows MOS - Pass
- Terms are explained -
- Factually accurate - Fail - Season summary does not have sourcing
- Broad - Weak Pass, though some places could use more explaining. Discussions could provide info where it otherwise is lacking, like describing how it organized and eyewall diameters
- Non-POV - Pass
- Stable - Pass
- Images - Pass
Metric and imperial units are needed in a lot of places in the article, and the Carlos infobox needs to be fixed. The impact section is useless, given the overall lack of info. For these reasons, I failed the GA, though once these issues are addressed you should try again, given that this is a good base. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Hurricane Fefa
I took this picture off and replaced it with the main one from the article.
It is obviously the same picture as the one currently on 1992 Atlantic hurricane season.Potapych (talk) 00:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
- http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tracks1949to2007_epa.txt
- In 1959 Mexico hurricane on 2011-05-25 03:38:59, 404 Not Found
- In 1975 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-25 04:40:15, 404 Not Found
- In 1991 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-25 05:56:22, 404 Not Found
- In 2001 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-25 07:11:09, 404 Not Found
- In 2006 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-26 02:11:28, 404 Not Found
- In 1959 Mexico hurricane on 2011-06-04 18:43:32, 404 Not Found
- In 1959 Mexico hurricane on 2011-06-04 21:55:32, 404 Not Found
- In 1968 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-06 13:54:59, 404 Not Found
- In 1975 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-06 21:14:29, 404 Not Found
- In 1991 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-08 00:41:50, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 00:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Dead link 3
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
- http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/names.html
- In 1991 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-25 05:56:34, 404 Not Found
- In 1991 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-08 00:42:25, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 00:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Dead link 5
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
- http://www.thehurricanearchive.com/Viewer.aspx?img=28417305_clean&firstvisit=true&src=search¤tResult=2¤tPage=0
- In 1991 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-08 00:42:16, 404 Not Found
- In 1991 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-24 19:15:06, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 19:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Zelda
We need to look up TY Zelda, for possible inclusion in this article.Jason Rees (talk) 15:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Landfalls in the season effects table
Why were landfalls removed when WPTC agreed to bold landfalls in the season effects table here? YE Pacific Hurricane 19:01, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- They should not be included since they are just a point and not significant, i also note that none of the decent other se charts have them. I also note that only one person reckoned we should mention them.Jason Rees (talk) 19:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC)