Talk:1887 Atlantic hurricane season
 | 1887 Atlantic hurricane season is currently an Earth sciences good article nominee. Nominated by 12george1 (talk) at 06:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: none |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
Todo
editOnly real issue is that of formatting and structure. Some AHS articles use a template form, but this one doesn't: all should be consistent. And the section headings are too small. Jdorje 21:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Any more info
editIs there any more information on those 5 possible storms?I'd love to make a button bar for it.HurricaneCraze32 23:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Doubt it. They are unofficial. Plus, it was so long ago without any notable storms that a button bar would be useless. Hurricanehink 00:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- The page could use re-formatting like 1914 did.HurricaneCraze32 10:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- Still doesn't need a button bar. Hurricanehink 11:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- Forget the bar.Here's how my reformatting is going. [1]. HurricaneCraze32 19:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- Each sub-section needs a full paragraph of info. Hurricanehink 21:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
"Possible storms"
editSince the best track data is an official source, anything they identify is not a "possible storm", it's a storm. — jdorje (talk) 23:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
- But they didn't confirm if they were storms or not. Hurricanehink 23:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, this is from the HRD's notes? OK then, those are "possible storms". We will run into some problems eventually however since the best track includes some really worthless (including 1-data-point) storms. What do you say about such a storm? — jdorje (talk) 23:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
- For those, I say those are real storms. Their existence is only proven for one point, but it was still a storm. Hurricanehink 00:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's what I thought these storms were (or rather, storms mentioned in the best track but for which there is no other information available). The question is, what do you write about such a storm? — jdorje (talk) 00:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- No idea. All you could say is, On August 23, a tropical storm made landfall on the island of St. Thomas, though its entire track is unknown. That's all there is. Luckily, there's only 29 single point storms, all of which are before 1871. Hurricanehink 02:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- Shall I leave 20 as extratropical and 21-23 as depressions?
2nd-where can i find more info,that review aint very good?HurricaneCraze32 19:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- No, they shouldn't be mentioned anywhere outside of the possible storm sections. They are not confirmed. Secondly, there is no more information. This was 119 years ago. Hurricanehink 20:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:1887 Atlantic hurricane season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: 12george1 (talk · contribs) 06:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 06:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- "off-season storms" should be linked
- "It is also worthy of note that the volume of recorded activity was documented largely without the benefit of modern technology." - can this be simplified?
- "Later, while the Atlantic hurricane reanalysis project did not add or remove any cyclones from the official hurricane database (HURDAT), the group lengthened the tracks of the sixth and fifteen storms and upgraded the latter to a hurricane. " - it should be reworded - "Later, the Atlantic hurricane reanalysis project lengthened... although they did not add or remove any cyclones."
- " Later, the sixth, seventh, and eighth storms caused two, more than one, and seven fatalities, respectively, nearly all offshore Newfoundland" - "The next three hurricanes all passed offshore Newfoundland over a two-week period, together causing at least ten deaths." You can probably skip the mention of the Bahamas and Carolinas since there weren't that many impacts there, and it focuses the narrative a bit.
- "In October, at least $10,000 in damage occurred in Louisiana due to the thirteenth storm, while the sixteenth cyclone inflicted at least $7,000 in damage after sinking a ship and drowned two people after another vessel capsized." - maybe instead focus on there being six storms in the month first, before going into details? It seems a bit rushed for a busy month, and I feel like the lead could go into a bit more detail, considering it was such an active season.
- Better?--12george1 (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- "The Atlantic hurricane reanalysis project did not add or remove any storms from the 1996 reanalysis of the season by meteorologists José Fernández-Partagás and Henry F. Diaz, who both added the first and third systems." were Partagas/Dias part of the reanalysis project? The wording is weirdly worded and a bit confusing.
- "when the track for the seventeenth system storm begins north of Puerto Rico" - the present tense felt unusual to me
- Fixed--12george1 (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- " Rapidly accelerating, the system became extratropical east of Ireland late on September 4." - east of Ireland is England/Wales
- Fixed--12george1 (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- There have been a lot of merge discussions of late, and I have to ask, is 1887 Halloween tropical storm worth keeping? There is a lot of duplicate information between the articles, and it doesn't seem like there is much of a notability reason for keeping that tropical storm article. Plus, it might not even have been a tropical storm. The whole 1887 article is under 7,000 words, so it's not like it would make the article too long.
All in all looks pretty good. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:16, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
I wanted to bring up the merger before finishing the GA review, as I believe the article is not needed. It's bloated how it describes the storms and the shipwrecks, and it seems like most of the content from that article is already in the season section. Not to mention there's a chance it wasn't even a tropical cyclone. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Agree. The article is less than 12k bytes. And even then, most of the impact section is information on shipwrecks, which I think can be easily condensed.--12george1 (talk) 02:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Support per above.
TyphoonAmpil(💬 - 📝) 02:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Shipwrecks are notable. 199.76.113.12 (talk) 20:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Considering the number of sockpuppets we've had in recent months, could the anonymous IP above please log in or create a user account? Also, the shipwrecks will still be mentioned if the article is merged. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
- Support – per nom. SomeoneWiki04 (talk) 15:03, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- No! I'm can't control any! Shipwrecks were still separated! Hink! MYSKaoi (talk) 10:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)