Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Eloise/archive1


 * 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 not promoted by Dabomb87 16:41, 30 January 2010.

Hurricane Eloise

 * Nominator(s): – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

This storm wrought a path of destruction from the Leeward Islands through New England. Among its effects were rainfall measured in feet instead of inches and winds which resulted in damage that can only be described as "a tangle of down power poles, lines and busted mains". Eloise's precipitation spread over Washington, D.C. on the same day that President Gerald Ford signed a Florida emergency declaration into law, and in the Mid-Atlantic states the flooding was so great that it was described as an event only seen once in every 50 to 100 years.

Given how notable this storm is, I went for a summary style rather than a proseline of every detail as I normally would. Still, at 2257 words, it's a sizable piece. It utilizes a variety of sources—from journals and books to newspapers. I'd like to give credit for reviewing the GA nomination and preforming numerous edits. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. Ucucha 16:01, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Support meets FA standards, another fine hurricane article. Dincher (talk) 01:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for the support! – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. Alt text done; thanks. Please add alt text to images; see WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 05:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, what's added looks quite good, except that the alt text for the maps need not talk about irrelevant details such as color; what counts is what's represented, not how it's represented (see WP:ALT). However, the lead image File:Hurricane Eloise.jpg still needs alt text. Eubulides (talk) 06:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I see it's done now, thanks. I it a bit to remove irrelevant detail as per WP:ALT and WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 03:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Check the toolbox; there is a dead link. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:14, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments It's pretty good, but could use some attention to fit and finish. I found lots of instances of "I wouldn't word it that way", some of which I listed below. General concern about accessibility: I find it difficult to assess the amount of jargon in these, owing to the sheer number of hurricane articles I've read here, but I suspect a layperson would be confused here and there. What is a depression? You seem to use "tropical storm" and "cyclone" interchangeably in the lead; are they? And so on. I really think it could benefit from a non-storm person combing through it and pointing out things they don't understand. Overall, nice work!
 * "Eloise made landfall along the Florida Panhandle before inland across Alabama and eventually dissipating by September 25." Is there a word missing here?
 * "In advance of the storm, about 100,000 residents evacuated from the Gulf Coast region." Later, you write that they evacuated from Louisiana to Florida. Isn't that also the Gulf Coast region? It's even odder that you describe the Florida preparations later; why did people go there when the danger existed there as well?
 * Ah, I see. When I said they evacuated from Louisiana to Florida I meant they evacuated areas stretching from Louisiana to Florida. Hopefully clearer now. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * " The storm killed a total of 80 people along its track" What is "a total of" adding to the sentence?
 * "The origins of Hurricane Eloise are traced back" I would use "The origins of Hurricane Eloise trace back"
 * "On September 16, the storm attained tropical storm status and was designated the name Eloise" Removing "the name" will suffice.
 * "weakened to a tropical storm" and "deteriorate into a minimal tropical storm"; well, which is it? I think "into".
 * "allowing for the storm to strengthen once again reach hurricane force" The word goblin again?
 * "it reached its peak winds" Is this standard terminology? To "reach winds"?
 * I've heard in quite a bit in similar contexts, so I'd guess it's acceptable. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "As a result, evacuations were often delayed." Do you mean some evacuations were delayed? This way, it sounds like the same evacuations were repeatedly delayed. Maybe that's true, but I'd still prefer the suggested text.
 * I would probably put non-breaking spaces between terms like "Category 3".
 * "An article in the Tallahassee Democrat reported that" Check the quotation that follows in the source. If it ends in a period, the period belongs inside the closing quote.
 * -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  23:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Done with most of these points. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 19:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * Spell out abbreviations in the footnotes (I noted USGS, but there may be others)
 * The two books listed in Further reading are used as sources, they should be "Sources" and NOT listed in Further reading, which is just for articles/books not used as sources but which might expand on the subject.
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, everyone, for the reviews. I'll try to get to these in the next couple days; at the moment I'm involved in the BLP debacle. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 21:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I'm caught up with everything now. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Comment Sorry, the article seems well-written, but I find it difficult to believe that criteria 1b and 1c have been met without any mention of the academic analysis that has been published. For example:
 * Follow-up -- I consider my concerns addressed. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  06:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support, excellent article. Ironholds (talk) 18:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Title: SEA-SURFACE TEMPERATURE RESPONSE TO HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): PRICE, JF
 * Source: TRANSACTIONS-AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION  Volume: 57   Issue: 4   Pages: 260-260   Published: 1976


 * Title: NOTE ON SEVERAL LOW-LAYER FEATURES OF HURRICANE ELOISE (1975)
 * Author(s): MOSS, MS; MERCERET, FJ
 * Source: MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW  Volume: 104   Issue: 7   Pages: 967-971   Published: 1976


 * Title: EFFECTS OF HURRICANE ELOISE ON BEACH AND COASTAL STRUCTURES, FLORIDA PANHANDLE
 * Author(s): MORTON, RA
 * Source: GEOLOGY  Volume: 4   Issue: 5   Pages: 277-280   Published: 1976


 * Title: RESPONSE OF GULF OF MEXICO TO HURRICANE ELOISE (1975)
 * Author(s): PLESCIA, JB
 * Source: BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY  Volume: 57   Issue: 4   Pages: 521-522   Published: 1976


 * Title: 3-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF QUANTIZED RADAR STRUCTURE OF EYEWALL OF HURRICANE ELOISE (1975)
 * Author(s): LEWIS, BM
 * Source: BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY  Volume: 57   Issue: 7   Pages: 869-870   Published: 1976


 * Title: OBSERVATION OF UPPER ATMOSPHERIC DISTURBANCES CAUSED BY HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): HUNG, RJ; SMITH, RE
 * Source: BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY  Volume: 57   Issue: 4   Pages: 526-526   Published: 1976


 * Title: OBSERVATION OF UPPER ATMOSPHERIC DISTURBANCES CAUSED BY HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): HUNG, RJ; SMITH, RE
 * Source: BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY  Volume: 57   Issue: 4   Pages: 526-526   Published: 1976


 * Title: NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE AND COASTAL ZONE - CASE-STUDY OF HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): SHOWS, EW
 * Source: WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN  Volume: 13   Issue: 5   Pages: 973-982   Published: 1977


 * Title: EFFECT OF HURRICANE ELOISE ON BENTHIC FAUNA OF PANAMA-CITY BEACH, FLORIDA, USA
 * Author(s): SALOMAN, CH; NAUGHTON, SP
 * Source: MARINE BIOLOGY  Volume: 42   Issue: 4   Pages: 357-363   Published: 1977


 * Title: OCEAN DATA BUOY MEASUREMENTS OF HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): JOHNSON, A; WITHEE, GW
 * Source: MARINE TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY JOURNAL  Volume: 12   Issue: 1   Pages: 14-21   Published: 1978


 * Title: IONOSPHERIC OBSERVATION OF GRAVITY-WAVES ASSOCIATED WITH HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): HUNG, RJ; KUO, JP
 * Source: JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICS-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GEOPHYSIK  Volume: 45   Issue: 1   Pages: 67-80   Published: 1978


 * Title: STUDY OF THE INTENSIFICATION OF HURRICANE-ELOISE
 * Author(s): LEWIS, BM; HAWKINS, HF
 * Source: BULLETIN OF THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY  Volume: 59   Issue: 11   Pages: 1549-1549   Published: 1978


 * Title: REMOTE MEASUREMENT OF THE POSITION AND SURFACE CIRCULATION OF HURRICANE ELOISE BY HF SKYWAVE RADAR
 * Author(s): MARESCA, JW; BARNUM, JR
 * Source: MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW  Volume: 107   Issue: 12   Pages: 1648-1652   Published: 1979


 * Title: HURRICANE ELOISE WAVE SPECTRA
 * Author(s): LEE, YK
 * Source: COASTAL ENGINEERING  Volume: 4   Issue: 2   Pages: 151-156   Published: 1980


 * Title: MIXED-LAYER SIMULATION OF BUOY OBSERVATIONS TAKEN DURING HURRICANE ELOISE
 * Author(s): MARTIN, PJ
 * Source: JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-OCEANS AND ATMOSPHERES  Volume: 87   Issue: NC1   Pages: 409-427   Published: 1982


 * If you can convince me that these do not deserve to be in the article, I will strike my 1b/c oppose and review the other criteria. (p.s. feel free to move this list to the talk page to save room.) Sasata (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow – I'm quite disappointed to see such an abrupt oppose without even a bit of discussion. Is there anything in particular you feel is missing from the article? That should be the main question; not whether or not there are sources I haven't chosen to reference. As I stated quite frankly in my nomination statement, this article is intended to be a summary of the storm rather than a database of details. Seems to me that most of those journals, some of which I have heard of, are very specific and wouldn't add much useful and broad information. (Also, I feel it should be known that Sasata and I are both competitors in the WikiCup.) – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 20:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * My oppose has nothing to do with the WikiCup; I'm trying to help with the FAC backlog by offering my opinion on whether the article meets FAC criteria. However, I have changed my oppose to a comment to reduce the potential appearance of COI. If you haven't looked at the journal articles, how can you say they "wouldn't add much useful and broad information"? I could go through these articles and look for material I feel is missing, but isn't that the job of the nominator? WIAFA criteria 1c: "(c) well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature on the topic." Sasata (talk) 21:19, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; my apologies for failing to assume good faith. I shall look through some of the listed journals this weekend. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 23:28, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Re: WikiCup, please don't even go there. I request that you strike that remark. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  21:02, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, my mistake. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 22:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.