Talk:Hurricane Diana

Image
An image is needed to go in the infobox. Jdorje 01:19, 7 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Got it. Hurricanehink 15:33, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Todo
More impact. Jdorje 21:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The article has not a single source! Jdorje 01:54, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, that sounds like a good candidate for a re-do. Hurricanehink 02:06, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yep, I figured if I knocked it down to stub it would show up on your radar ;-). Jdorje 02:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I guess, but damn! I just tried a search, and there is nothing on this storm. Outside of the NHC report, there's next to no mention anywhere on the web. This article might be doomed to forever low-quality for an impact section. I expected something to be in the ReliefWeb Website, but nothing! There are little bits of information here and there, like Diana causing rainfall or encountering warm water temperatures, but there is not enough for an impact section. I'll try doing some more research another time, but this storm might be doomed. Hurricanehink 03:01, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Never fear, Storm05 is here!. Ive found a better Montly Weather Review Storm05 16:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

That link gives me nothing. — jdorje (talk) 17:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No! Storm05, are you positive the link is right? That is exactly what is needed for the 1990 Atlantic hurricane season. Hurricanehink 17:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Nevermind. Awesome find Storm05! It worked. I'll redo this article later. Hurricanehink 19:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it works now. BTW, at Monthly Weather Review there are links to archives of *all* the MWR issues (by month).  The NHC only includes excerpts from each year of articles they deem applicable (included as part of the re-analysis).  If you find an article they've left out, you might want to contact them about it. — jdorje (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Damn, sooo little online. Here's a list of the 1990 Flood Archive, which might help a little... a very little. Hurricanehink 00:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Good news. I found a Spanish site (luckily I know Spanish fairly well), and I got a damage total and a death total. I found some more specifics, but there is absolutely nothing else out there on this storm. Does that qualify it for FA status by default? LOL, j/k, but this is one storm that is doomed in terms of information. Hurricanehink 04:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Same problem with most Mexican storms a bit back in the past, sources are few and far between... but I am a native speaker, so I can translate a few things for this article. Tito xd (?!? - help us) 03:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I stole what I could and ran! You could mention how the sea turtles were affected from this site, or keep saying what's already written of what's here, but I don't think there's anything else out there. You can check yourself though, seeing as you're native. You might catch something I missed. Hurricanehink 03:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. 68.22.252.165 06:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have upgraded this to B-Class (for now). Storm05 15:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I would be fine reviewing this again, if you want, but would you mind addressing the comments from the first GAN? That way I (or anyone else) could see what progress has been made. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:06, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Lacking info
This article is greatly lacking in preparations, impact and aftermath. To expand these sections, look through news reports, situations reports, disaster databases and ReliefWeb. I would suggest withdrawing this article from GAN and work on expanding the article before revisiting GAN. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:36, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Did you not read the discussion before this? There is really no other new reports, situation reports, disaster databases, and there is nothing at all of ReliefWeb. Even back then nearly 5 years ago it was nearly at its maximum content. Let me search Google News, I going to update the article a little bit, because its going to take probably at least a month for someone to be willing to assess the article.--12george1 (talk) 01:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can get from a news archive when the holiday break is over, since I can only access it from school. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 06:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, I was gone on the holiday break, but I checked Google News before I left and there was almost nothing else out there on Diana.--12george1 (talk) 03:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 03:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Pre-GA review review

 * There really seems to be info missing. Compare Diana with Hurricane Gert (1993), which caused less deaths and only did slightly more damage. Do some Google book and Google scholar searches. For that matter, get sources from Lexis Nexis, and find Texas impact.
 * "Due to the interaction with land" - just "Due to land interaction"
 * "before losing all tropical characteristics" - is this true? The remnants had some tropical characteristics, such as convection and winds, I'm assuming. Why not just say when the surface circulation dissipated here?
 * You don't mention non-Mexico effects outside of the lede.
 * "that emerged into the Atlantic from the west coast of Africa on July 27" --> "that exited western Africa into the Atlantic on July 27".
 * "assigned the system to the name Diana" - switch this around (assigned the name Diana to the system)
 * Mention SSHS in the MH
 * "from a low-end category 2 hurricane immediately to a strong tropical storm just within four hours later "
 * "Nine hours after all warnings were along the Yucatán Peninsula" - missing word?
 * "and a hurricane watch was issued for Tuxpan to Boca de Jesus Maria; a hurricane watch notes" - find a way to remove two close usages of "hurricane watch"
 * "the National Hurricane Center anticipated on hurricane conditions" - remove the "on". This is the third review of the article that has mentioned this.
 * Was there any impact in Belize?
 * "On the offshore island of Cozumel" - I'd specify where, since Mexico is a big country
 * "While crossing over the Yucatán Peninsula, Mérida reported" - so Mérida crossed over the Yucatán peninsula?
 * "37 and 45 mph (59.5 and 72.4 km/h)"
 * "according to the National Weather Service" - the US NWS?
 * Get clarity on the death/damage total in MX.
 * As I asked in the first GA review, "What does it mean that 75,000 people were affected?"
 * - add this for more CA impact. It's sad that there's more info on California than Belize.

--♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Hurricane Diana vs Gert
These two hurricanes were Category 2. Both killed over 100 people; both also had winds of a hundred miles per hour. If Diana was retired, Gert should have also been retired. Angela Maureen (talk) 06:10, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Image..
The image in Gert and Diana are the same. Which one is which, because some readers will get confused by this. which is which? Cyclone  Toby  contribs 04:19, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * They're similar for sure, but they're not identical. They both happened to hit the same place around the same intensity, so naturally they look similar. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)