Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Naomi (1968)/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 02:16, 21 May 2008.

Hurricane Naomi (1968)
I'm nominating this article for featured article because...as the creator/main editor associated with the article, I believe that this article now, as a result of a peer review, adheres to the criteria for FAs. So, as a result, I self-nominate this article for FA status. Any compliments, comments, or criticism is welcome and very much encouraged. Thanks! Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 00:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The "Storm path" image caption could be a bit better...you could describe the path a bit, to make the image more meaningful.
 * "A short-lived hurricane which rapidly organized to a Category 1 hurricane" - can alternative words ("storm", perhaps?) be used instead of the repetition of hurricane?
 * Should em dashes (—) be used in the 2nd para of the lead?
 * In the refs, I don't think Associated Press should be listed as an author. Also, the newspaper publishers should be in italics.


 * Oppose. Impressive work digging up all those old sources, and a good start, but the prose is quite rough. The lead was downright painful - long, unwieldy sentences, awkward constructions, some basic grammar errors.  MoS breaches found. I see you had a peer review but you really need to get some more eyes on this before it's ready to post here.  I would tap any number of authors that have written excellent hurricane FAs, as this looks to have been mainly a one-editor show.  Examples:
 * "A short-lived hurricane which rapidly organized to a Category 1 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale before landfall, Naomi crossed Mexico while active, dumping heavy rains through Mexico and Texas in connection with a frontal system over the Gulf Coast, with heaviest rains falling in Corpus Christi, Texas." Toooo loooooong.
 * "Although a worker was injured in Texas when the rains from Naomi's remains caused the roof of the plant they were working in to collapse..." Wording, grammar.
 * MoS examples: Hyphen in a citation that should be an en dash; need non-breaking spaces between numbers and the non-number item they go with (ex 3:00 GMT) - Laser brain  (talk)  03:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following sources reliable?
 * http://stormadvisory.org/
 * Current ref 2 "William J. Denney Eastern Pacific Hurricane Season of 1968" is lacking a publisher
 * Being on the road, I didnt check external links. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Question Why does the see also section have a link to Olga? It's a different basin, for pete's sake! ;) Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  01:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * OK thanks all who've commented. I heard this out, and I'll answer. First, I tweaked out the Olga link. At first, I gave it as an example of what could have happened in Mexico, but to that degree, I'd have to add every cyclone to cause effects via dam breaks or openings. Also, the reason I used the Storm Advisory source was to give an image of where, location-wise, the cyclone dissipated. Best track would be good, but plotting the towns would take slight guesswork. And to address Dihydrogen, if you noticed, pretty much all WPTC articles (even FAs) have the same storm path idea, so the need to change it isn't of great importance, especially considering that the storm history discusses the path in more effect. Finally, I will change the AP writers, but only if there is something better to substitute them with, such as the newspaper who published the article (in my career of using that site for sources, rarely are individuals credited with the writing). Everything else I can work on to my best degree. More comments are appreciated! Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 04:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment . I rewrote the first paragraph of the lede, but I couldn't make sense of the second paragraph. Also, the article starts with the boilerplate "Naomi was the nth tropical cyclone, mth tropical storm, and lth hurricane of the k hurricane season" that is too common in hurricane lead sections. Please write why the storm was important first, then start with the statistics. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 07:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I saw that you added a sentence to the lede, but it was too general. While Wikipedia isn't governed by journalistic practices, the Five Ws are a good idea to keep in mind while editing an introduction. I rewrote the entire lede, removing most of the ESSA-6 stuff (it was irrelevant for a lede) and trying to copyedit it at the same time. That said, the article itself is not bad, but it has paragraphs that are too long and disorganized at times. So, weak object. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 21:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.