Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tropical Storm Karina (2008)/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 User:SandyGeorgia 23:46, 9 January 2009.

Tropical Storm Karina (2008)

 * Nominator(s): Cyclonebiskit (talk)

The first thing that will likely stand out with this article, is it's small size. However, size doesn't always matter, and when size may be lacking, quality sticks out. This article has been through several copyedits, a peer review, and has been fully reviewed by the editors of WP:WPTC. All thoughts and comments are encouraged and welcome.Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments; even assuming that all conversions are precise (which is probably the case), maybe it would be better to use conversion templates? Also, I believe that single digit numbers should be spelled out (such as nine instead of 9).  Conversion template helps because they follow article MoS, including spelling out single digit numbers and spelling out the first unit (the unit in which the number is converted to, in parenthesis, is left abbreviated, however).  Furthermore, I know that the article says and cites that it was a shortlived storm, but that doesn't mean that it was one of the shortest lived storms.  In other words, the first sentence of the lead may be considered original research, since it's not supported by the text (that it is one of the shortest is not intuitive from the fact that it was a short lived storm). JonCatalán(Talk) 04:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've corrected the opening statement, I meant to change it before the nomination but it seems I forgot to. In an off-wiki discussion, it was determined that it was best to stay away from that claim as it doesn't specify the type of storm (i.e. Tropical Depression, Tropical Stom...). Regarding the units, the only digit that is less than ten that is in numbers is 9 for mph. In that case, since it's conversion is greater than 10, it would be better to keep it as a number instead of written out for consistency. With the conversion templates, they don't match up with the NHC distances, as they only use numbers divisible by five. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In regards to conversion templates, the problem with them is that they have no way of taking into account the fact that the figures for maximum sustained winds and maximum estimated gusts are already rounded to the nearest multiple of five. As a result, when they apply the conversion, they treat it as an exact quantity, which a) gives the appearance of more precision than there actually is, and b) removes accuracy in the measurement. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 21:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Given these comments and the comments below, I give my support. JonCatalán(Talk) 23:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you sure there's no impact info for Socorro? –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 14:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm almost certain there was none, but I'll check again to be safe. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Didn't find anything on impact. I checked both English and Spanish sources. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Socorro port closed, Rain, waves, and wind in Oaxaca and Chiapas. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 16:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks JC, I've added them to the article. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:15, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Looks good so far. I've only done a brief look through, but I'll be back later with more comments. VX! 18:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments on prose.
 * Tropical Storm Karina was a weak, short lived tropical cyclone which developed during the 2008 Pacific hurricane season. - "Which" &rarr; "that".
 * Karina was designated a tropical storm for only 12 hours before being downgraded to a tropical depression. - It's odd that you mention tropical storm status before you talk about the storm's development.
 * Moved to a later part of the lead. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The 12th tropical cyclone and 11th named storm of the season, it developed out of the same tropical wave which spawned Hurricane Gustav in the Atlantic basin. - This makes it sound like Karina developed in the Atlantic.
 * I've changed developed to originated, not sure if that's the best wording though. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, the more I think about it, the relation to Gustav probably doesn't need to be mentioned in the lead. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've removed Gustav from the lead. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Later that day, wind shear weakened the storm to a depression on September 3, and it dissipated shortly thereafter. - Remove the last comma.
 * The origins of Tropical Storm Karina are from the southern portion of the tropical wave that also spawned Hurricane Gustav in the Caribbean Sea. - Why the present tense?
 * After two days over water, the wave triggered the development of an area of low pressure south of Manzanillo, Mexico. - No need for "over water". Also, "triggered" &rarr; "spawned".
 * The low was located beneath an area of moderate convection, but was nearing cooler waters and a moist, but stable, air mass. - Change the second "but" to "yet" to avoid repetition of the word.
 * In an area favorable for development, the formation of a tropical cyclone was possible and a tropical cyclone formation alert was issued on September 2. - Remove "the formation of a tropical cyclone was possible". Technically, tropical cyclone formation is possible any day.
 * However, strong easterly shear caused the showers and thunderstorms to become displaced from the center. - Change this to "However, strong easterly shear separated the showers and thunderstorms from the center."
 * Despite the shear, sufficient convection developed around the center; the National Hurricane Center (NHC) classified it a tropical depression at 0600 UTC, while located 390 miles (630 km) south of the southern tip of Baja California.[1] The NHC initially recognized the system as a tropical depression and did not initiate advisories on it until several hours later.[4] The depression quickly intensified into a tropical storm due to a brief relaxation of the wind shear and was given the name Karina while located about 25 mi (40 km) north of Socorro Island. - This is confusing. Why mention twice that it was designated a tropical depression by the NHC?
 * Karina had winds of 40 mph (65 km/h) upon being named, which was its peak intensity. - This sentence sounds like it's trying too hard to be written professionally. Try "Upon becoming a tropical storm, Karina reached its peak winds of 40 mph (65 km/h)".
 * There was uncertainty as to the intensity of the storm as the Dvorak technique—a system used to estimate the intensity of a tropical cyclone—rendered an intensity of 50 mph (80 km/h) but since the center of the storm had just moved under the deep convection, the winds were held at minimal tropical storm intensity. - Needs a couple commas to improve flow. Also, "since" &rarr; "because".
 * That night, only 12 hours after being declared a tropical storm, Karina was downgraded to a tropical depression. - "Only" is POV.
 * The foreword motion also began to gradually slow. - Rather clunky wording.
 * By the morning of September 3, convection had been blown 125 mi (200 km) from the center of circulation, leaving only a swirl of clouds. - "Blown away" sounds awkward in this context.
 * The remnant low quickly dissipated that afternoon without redevelopment. - If the low dissipated, it is already assumed that there was no redevelopment.
 * When the National Hurricane Center issued its first advisory on Karina, the storm was located very close to the island of Socorro. - "Very close" &rarr; "near".
 * There were no known preparations taken prior to the storm, as the island is mainly a natural reserve and the only inhabitants reside in a military base. - Does the source explicitly say there were no preparations?
 * On Clarion Island, residents took minor actions to prepare for possible impacts from the storm. - Why is "impact" plural?
 * Officials advised residents to cancel all coastal activities and comply with advice from the National Civil Protection. - Remove "all". As a side note, is it possible to elaborate on what advice the agency provided?
 * Small crafts were advised to take extreme caution. - "Take "&rarr; "exercise".
 * Small crafts such as water taxis and jet skis were to stay at the port. - This should be merged with the previous sentence, and "stay" &rarr; "remain".
 * There were also no ship reports of sustained tropical storm-force winds. - Remove "also". Were there any reports of tropical storm-force gusts?
 * I haven't seen anything on gusts, and the TCR doesn't say there were recorded gusts either. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In that case, it would be best to remove "sustained". –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Removed sustained. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

–Juliancolton Happy Holidays 19:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * When the area of low pressure was upgraded to Tropical Storm Karina on September 2, it was the first use of the name Karina for a tropical cyclone. - This contradicts other parts of the article in that it says the low pressure went straight to tropical storm status, while the lead says it was first designated a depression.
 * This value—an approximation of the kinetic energy used by a tropical system throughout its existence—is, so far, the lowest of the season. - The season already ended.
 * I've addressed most of the issues you've noted. A couple notes below some of them if I had an issue or there was a significant change. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments on the prose and requests for clarification. I enjoyed reading this article but I need to see more reviews before supporting this FAC. Thanks. Graham Colm Talk 15:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In this sentence: The origins of Tropical Storm Karina were from the southern portion of the tropical wave that also spawned Hurricane Gustav in the Caribbean Sea.  The expression "The origins ....were from.." sounds odd. I know it was not a storm to begin with but, how about "Tropical Storm Karina originated in the southern portion the tropical wave that also spawned Hurricane Gustav in the Caribean Sea." ?
 * I think here: However, strong easterly shear separated the showers and thunderstorms from the center. Center sounds odd to the lay reader; they will be left thinking center of what.
 * The word "advisories" clearly has a precise meaning here. Can you expand/explain it?
 * The word "located" is used a lot and often it is redundant as here for example, When the National Hurricane Center issued its first advisory on Karina, the storm was located near the island of Socorro. How about a simple "the storm"? Are all the other uses of "located" justified?
 * Please don't use "prior to" when a simple "before" carries exactly the same meaning.
 * I've corrected the issues you've addressed and clarified what an advisory is. I'm a little unsure as to why advisory needed to be clarified though. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I might be because I am English. I guessed it meant "advice notice" or "warning notice" or something similar. Graham Colm Talk 16:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In the UK we get a "severe weather warning" when rain is forecast. :-) Graham. Graham Colm Talk 22:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Fundamental oppose on featuring something so short and non-notable, but since I know that will be ignored, I have other comments in the form of an actual oppose.
 * Meteorological terms (like Tropical wave, convection, shear, ridge) could be explained better.
 * Reference #3 doesn't say anything about the circulation developing. They just said it exists. What if it developed days prior? Likewise, I'm a little confused what the phrase developed partially underneath means. Did it develop partially? Or did it develop partially underneath.
 * Question: why did the NHC not classify it right away?
 * However, strong easterly shear separated the showers and thunderstorms from the center of circulation. Despite the shear, sufficient convection developed around the center
 * I'm a little confused at these sentences. Does it mean that the shear separated the convection from the circulation at first, and then additional convection developed around the center? Or is there some redundancy I'm missing?
 * The depression quickly intensified into a tropical storm due to a brief relaxation of the wind shear and was given the name Karina while located about 25 mi (40 km) north of Socorro Island
 * This sentence is a bit of a run-on, and the subject becomes a bit clouded.
 * There was uncertainty as to the intensity of the storm, as the Dvorak technique—a system used to estimate the intensity of a tropical cyclone—rendered an intensity of 50 mph (80 km/h); but because the center of the storm had just moved under the deep convection, the winds were held at minimal tropical storm intensity.
 * There are some grammar problems in the . The semicolon means the last statement should not begin with but because, as that's basically starting a sentence with but because. Maybe try splitting it into two sentences? I'm confused why the intensity would be lower if the center just moved under the deep convection. Typically that means the storm is becoming stronger.
 * That night, 12 hours after being declared a tropical storm, Karina was downgraded to a tropical depression
 * This sentences comes as somewhat of a surprise. I suggest moving the sentence that follows it to before it, as you should explain what's happening before you say what happened.
 * The foreword motion gradually decreased.
 * Aside from the typo (shouldn't it be forward?), that is a really short sentence.
 * Maybe explain what dissipation means?
 * "Dissipation" is a fairly common word. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  21:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Top five hits from dictionary.com on "dissipation" - 1) "the act of dissipating" 2) "the state of being dissipated" 3) "a wasting by misuse" 4) "mental distraction" 5) "dissolute way of living". I think some clarification couldn't hurt ;) ♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, I'm still not too keen on adding unnecessary explanation to a well-known term. I suppose a link to Tropical cyclone would be alright, though. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  22:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers. ♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * Image review File:Karina 2008 track.png - Please list the author for this image - not everyone who edits the image page is really an author of the image itself. Since it is the author that releases the copyright, so the author must be listed. (Why do I always have to ask for this at hurricane articles?) Awadewit (talk) 22:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Long story short, it is because did not have the ability to name authors until recently. All the pages with the older version of the template are placed in Category:Tropical cyclone tracks needing update, which I started to clean up; however, I got a request to stop, as the track maps will be overwritten with a bot in a future update, which is coming real soon now. So, the only images that are cleaned up are those in which people actually ask for it... Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 01:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with "See file history?" I can't delete any of the file history so I don't think it is credited correctly the way it is now (because we did not collaborate on the picture). Usually individual editors contributed different versions of the images. Actually, in this case every single editor was the creator of the image. It was pretty self-explanatory the other way. Potapych (talk) 02:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There is an ambiguity on the page between the history of the file and the history of the image page (yet another type of file). If I change the description of the image, for example, I am not really altering the image itself, yet that is recorded in the history of the page. The larger point is that these tags need to be as clear as possible. If you want, you can make the author information even more explicit, but at least the basic information is there now. Awadewit (talk) 13:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see any ambiguity with that. It only says "File history" in one place. Clicking on the history tab brings you to a page called "Revision history of File:..." The way it is currently set up is ambiguous because it infers that Ramisses and I worked on the current file together, when we did it completely independent of one another. Potapych (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The tag has been changed at Commons to try to ameliorate this problem slightly. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 21:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hink, the hyphen problem that we've spent much time commenting on in previous FACs hits you in the opening sentence: "Tropical Storm Karina was a weak, short lived tropical cyclone that developed during the 2008 Pacific hurricane season." North American English uses hyphens less than other varieties, but insists on "short-lived". In fact, I see many hyphens in good US English—perhaps the differences are overstated.
 * "originated out of" ... bit clunky. "grew out of", but probably "originated from" is better.
 * "... later in the morning, at which time it was named Karina ..."—Are you scanning your text later like a radar beam to locate opportunities for removing verbose expressions? "... later in the morning, when it was named Karina ...".
 * "and it dissipated shortly thereafter"—sounds like the small print on an insurance document. Simple, please: "and it dissipated soon after".

I'm not seeing the personal investment in simple measures to improve your prose: the hurrican project and WP more broadly need you to do this. To start with, try these exercises on hyphens and dashes. Tony  (talk)  02:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Note I'm withdrawing this nomination as I now feel that this article isn't ready for FA and to allow me to have more time to deal with other, more important articles. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.