Talk:Hurricane Odile (1984)/GA2

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 21:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First and foremost, you need to get the status on the hundreds of missing people. If true, that could make Odile one of the deadliest Pacific hurricanes ever. Surely such a high death total would be mentioned in some newspapers, even if it was the 40. However, this is the only one in a Google news search for [Mexico deaths] in September and October of 1984, so something doesn't seem right. Where does the source that gives the 40 deaths get its info from? This list of Mexican disasters only lists the San Juanico Disaster as occurring in 1984, no mention of Odile. I do see a few sources when looking up "mexico muertos 1984 huracan" that brings up the exact same wording for "Odilia" in 1984 that caused 40 deaths and hundreds of people missing, but none of them go into any further detail. So, I'm a little skeptical about that total.
- Yea, I saw several news articles about that, but IIRC I used the El Universal, one of best newspapers in Mexico, said it, and I highly trust it. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, I doubt I will be able to find anything about their status. This is Mexico, after all. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - But I pointed out a source from the United Nations that included much less deadly storms. I just find it quite odd that there is no mention for those 40 deaths other than that one source. Can you provide an additional source that verifies the 40 deaths that does not have that exact same wording? And furthermore, you should find out about the hundreds of missing people. It was 28 years ago! I don't know what you mean by "This is Mexico, after all." Aside from being slightly racist, the country is well-developed and would likely have some record of a hurricane killing hundreds of people in the 1980s. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - The El Universal is a major newspaper in Mexico, and I recon the several other sources used it because they trusted it, so why can't we use it? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Also, the source was published in 2007, while the the UN source could be older? Mexican storms tend to have tons of missing ppl in them, Cristina 96 and Kiko 07 are good examples of this. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        But I'm saying, it's odd that no other sources verify that data, particularly given how deadly the storm apparently was. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:44, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        It is a little odd indeed, but that's not a surprise given the time period. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above aside, I think the first sentence could be more interesting.
- What do you suggest? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - That Odile was the third of fourth tropical cyclones to strike Mexico? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Has everything been addressed from the previous GAN?
- Yes, all of GC's comments were adressed before it failed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the lede say it developed on September 16th when the infobox says the 17th?
- I see where the 16th came from, but it is really the 17th. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Can you fix it then? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - It should be fixed now. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You should mention the storm's wavering track offshore, as that is fairly unusual.
- Added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"and was downgraded to a tropical storm shortly before landfall, which was northwest of Zihuatanejo" - cut down the last portion to "shortly before landfall at Zihuatanejo".
- That would be fatlly inccurate, but I changed it to something esle. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You mention two different death totals in the lede.
- That's what happens when you update an article's deathtoll. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"The depression began to curve more towards the northwest of a narrow ridge located over southern Mexico" - I don't see how that's possible, considering the storm was offshore Mexico. How could it be northwest of a ridge over Mexico?
"the depression was upgraded to Tropical Storm Odile" - who did this?
- The EPHC. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"the EPHC" - you never once explained/linked to this
- I did, lol. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Now you have. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
" By the afternoon of September 19" - local time? UTC?
- UTC like most project articles. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - But most project articles don't say vague terms like "the afternoon". --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - This should be taken care of. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"the EPHC reported that Odile had attained hurricane status while turning towards the east" - based on what for the intensity? And why did it turn east?
- The first idk, the second has kinda been added. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - So there is no basis for how the EPHC knew it was a hurricane? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Likely Dvoark, but the EPHC almost never mentions that in the MWR. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Late on September 21, Hurricane Odile reached its peak intensity of 105 mph (165 km/h) (a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale) as it approached Acapulco." - how was that intensity ascertained?
- Huh? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Per above, how did they know it had that peak intensity? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - See above. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"While maintaining peak intensity for a half of a day, the cyclone began to turn more northwestward in response to the weakening of the ridge." - you just said it was because of the trough that it turned to the northwest. Which one was it?
- No, I don't think I said that, but I am somewhat confused here. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Now there seems to be a bit of a redundancy. You say that the trough caused the storm to turn to the west-northwest, and that the weakening ridge turned it to the northwest. That seems to be just one event. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)--♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Not really IMO. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"the cloud pattern of Odile moved northwest, passing east of Manzanillo before weakening as it re-curved towards Texas" - how can the cloud pattern weaken if the storm was no longer a tropical cyclone?
- Just becuase there is no LLc, does not mean a cloud pattern can weaken. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - But how? I understand if the cloud pattern becomes disorganized, but weakens implies intensity, which implies a circulation, but if it wasn't a TC, I don't see how it can weaken after it was no longer a TC. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Non-TC can weaken as well. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"According to press reports in Mexico City, officials warned that illness may occur due to overflowed sewers and a lack of drinking water." - how is this related to Odile for what happened in Mexico City?
- Mexico City is not that far inland, so it is possible. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - But was it from Odile? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Apparently. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Due to flooding from a combination of storms before Odile, over 40,000 people evacuated their homes due to flooding in Acapulco." - can you avoid saying "due to flooding" twice in the same sentence?
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"In addition, 11 people died when they were washed away in their homes." - was this due to Odile? The newspaper said "washed away during storms before Odile hit"
- No. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did Odile really cause rainfall as far as Costa Azul, Uruguay?
- No :P Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Throughout the country, rainfall fell in 2,201 locations." - what does that even mean?
- Removed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
" In all, Odile brought the heaviest rains to the region since 1978." - the newspaper said that the rains before Odile were the heaviest, not the storm itself.
- Added a note about other systems. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Due to heavy rainfall, the ongoing floods in Mexico continued. Acapulco Mayor Alfonso Arugdin Alcaraz reported that flooding damaged roughly 900 homes, inundated 30 miles (50 km) of highways, triggered an evacuation of 7,000 people, and left 20,000 families without water service." - none of this is cited by ref 4
- Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"In Mexico City, flooding streets brought traffic jams. Many homes were on the brink of collapse, though damage through the city was considered relatively minor. About 80% of the crops in the state of Guerrero were damaged." - I don't think any of this was due to Odile. For Mexico City, the article said Odile's rain was minimal, but there was "unusually heavy rainfall this season", so it's not clear if the traffic jams were from the hurricane. Ditto with the homes on collapse - that wasn't Odile. And the crops in Guerrero is similarly unclear, but the context implies it was due to preceding rainfall.
- Removed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"only to be resumed on September 23" - this isn't needed.
- I don't see any reason why not to have it. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - It's trivial, and you already said "suspended for two days" --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Switched this slightly. Any better now? Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"and thousands were left homeless" - where does it say Odile did this?
- Removed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:58, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:03, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The evacuations in Acapulco should be removed, as that was caused by the previous storms. Notice how it says "flooding had forced the evacuations...", right after a paragraph saying "damaged an already battered area". --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Condensed this part. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]