Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was kept by SchroCat 08:42, 14 April 2014.

List of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States

 * Notified: WikiProject United States, Meteorology articles task force, Pacific hurricane task force, Atlantic hurricane task force

I am nominating this for featured list removal because this list does not do what it purports to do. A list of the wettest tropical cyclones in the United States should list the tropical cyclones that produced the highest rainfall totals in the country, not 50 top-10 lists by state. Precipitation amounts should be given by total rainfall in the country, not the amount of rainfall that happened to occur in a particular state. I recommend that the state-specific top-10 lists be removed from this article and added as a new section on the corresponding state hurricane lists (such as List of New Jersey hurricanes). The List of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States article should be rewritten with country-wide data and a format similar to that of List of the most populous counties in the United States. Neelix (talk) 00:10, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: In my opinion this list does what it claims to do which is too provide, an unbiased view of the wettest tropical cyclones in the United States and islands. If we were too do it the way Neelix suggests i feel it would be too biased towards the most significant twenty cyclones and wouldn't be as diverse. Also i dont think it is recorded that a tropical cyclone dropepd this amount of rain at a national level but should be able to clarify this.Jason Rees (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * What is the wettest tropical cyclone in the United States? This article doesn't tell us, but the title suggests it will. The only bias I can see that would result from restructuring this article would be towards the subject the title lays out for us, and that is exactly the kind of bias we want on Wikipedia: a focus on the subject at hand. I have nominated this list to go up on the main page twice, and it has been rejected both times. During the second nomination, which can be seen here, The Rambling Man indicated that the article required considerable overhaul and should be brought here for featured list removal, and I agree with him. Neelix (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * While i dont disgree that the article needs some work with the lead expanding and the blurbs for each state expanding. It does tell us that Hurricane Hiki is the wettest tropical cyclone in the United States.Jason Rees (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like your main objection would be removed if there was a simple table of the highest rainfall totals in the US, right? Right now, it's a list of the highest amounts in each state, which required a hefty amount of research and for which I do not think it should lose its featured status. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 04:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, adding a table of the highest rainfall totals in the US would address my concern. Evan points out below that such a table already exists at List of wettest tropical cyclones by country, so if we duplicate that table, here, I would see that as solving the problem. I would prefer that solution to renaming the list. Neelix (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Great! I did that. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 20:06, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Hink! I'm sorry to be picky, but the article title does not specify the contiguous United States, but rather the United States in general. Could another section be added listing the overall wettest tropical cyclones in the United States as a whole, or could the new section be expanded in scope to include the rest of the country? Hurricane Hiki should be at the top of the overall list. Neelix (talk) 16:10, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright, I added Hiki and Paul to the overall list, thanks to Hawaii. I did exclude territories though, is that OK? ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That looks great to me. So long as no one else would object to a TFL nomination of this article, my concerns have been addressed. Neelix (talk) 15:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Im not happy about excluding territories in the overall wettest list. In my opinion it should reflect the rainfall totals overall rather than just the states since we are including territories in the list itself. Also i would suspect that we would include the French Territories in the list rather than just the french mainland states.Jason Rees (talk) 16:03, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure I agree. We wouldn't include Bermuda in a list for UK. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:15, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If we are including the US territories in the list (like we are already) then they should be included in the overall list.Jason Rees (talk) 17:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Why? You look at a map of the United States, and most likely it isn't going to include Guam, American Samoa, Palmyra Atoll, etc. It's good they're included in the whole article, but I don't think it's necessary for a top 10 for the United States proper. The table isn't the same as the lede, meaning it doesn't have to summarize everything in the article. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:18, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

I just feel that it would be more useful/interesting for it too summarize everything in the article especially since there are one or two big rainfall totals in Puerto Rico that would be included.Jason Rees (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That'd make sense for the lede, where everything should be summarized, but I don't think it's needed for just the US table. As I've said, the US proper is more valuable as a top 10 list than including territories that a lot of people in the US don't even realize are territories of the US. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Why don't we do both? We could have one section listing the overall totals for the country as a whole, and another section listing the overall totals just for the contiguous United States. Neelix (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Added. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:55, 3 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The fact that it does not explicitly say what the wettest is a minor quibble that it does not deserve to become an FL. With that said, I do think the tables are a bit ranky, but not sure if we can do anything about it. FYI, this does list the top 10 wettest in the Lower 38. Also, maybe re-title this List of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States by state? YE Pacific  Hurricane 13:35, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment would certainly advocate a page move to "List of tropical cyclones with highest rainfall...." as "wettest" is not really accurately descriptive enough here. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It's a term used by NOAA - - to refer the rainfall records. Titles should be concise when possible. I think "List of tropical cyclones with the highest rainfall in the United States" is just a bit too long IMO, and it doesn't provide much more. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk )  05:10, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well for concise, see "highest rainfall", which all readers of English can understand, while wettest is open to interpretation unless you happen to be an expert or use NOAA websites. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * While i am not saying that is wrong to be insisting on highest rainfall, it is worth noting that the Hong Kong Observatory also uses Wettest Tropical cyclones on Page 100. Jason Rees (talk) 16:49, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - My concerns have been addressed. This discussion started more than three months ago and there have been no new comments for almost two months now. The only outstanding issue I see in the discussion is the matter of the article's title, about whether we should employ the term "wettest" or "with highest rainfall". Is this a problem we need to solve in this FLRC discussion or can we solve it in a RM once the FLRC has been closed? Neelix (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * As far as im concerned we dont really need a requested move at this moment in time but i will leave that up to the FLRC delegates to decide/guide us: .Jason Rees (talk) 12:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Review closed as keep. - SchroCat (talk) 08:50, 14 April 2014 (UTC)


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