Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Category 4 Pacific hurricanes/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list 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 promoted by Giants2008 23:07, 23 January 2012 [1].
List of Category 4 Pacific hurricanes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): HurricaneFan25 13:35, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it is extremely well-referenced and the prose is of high quality. Thanks for your consideration, HurricaneFan25 13:35, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It was odd to me at first, for example, to not see Ioke listed. Sure, it topped out at Category 5, but that still means it was Category 4 as well. So at the very least, the scope of the list needs to be specified or clarified. Looking at the list of Cat 4 Atlantic storms, the intro specifies that storms which reached Cat 5 strength are not included, this needs to do that as well. --Golbez (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Addressed in the table's notes and the lede. HurricaneFan25 18:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 14:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
NapHit (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|
- Support NapHit (talk) 14:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
- As I've already conferred with you, a have a problem with the first image caption. Saying that a Category 4 hurricane was the most intense one not to attain Category 5 status is like saying a Category 2 hurricane (Let's take Rina for example) was the most intense one not to attain Category 3 status. Doesn't make much sense, does it? I may have some more comments over the coming days. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Meh, removed part of it... ?. HurricaneFan25 — 00:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Makes more sense now, thanks. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Meh, removed part of it... ?. HurricaneFan25 — 00:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 18:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments –
|
- Support made a couple of minor changes, but reviewed this at peer review so no major traumas for me. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Not seeing anything of concern here. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 22:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.