Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/2013 Atlantic hurricane season/archive1
5 articles
- Contributor(s): 12george1, Hurricanehink, TropicalAnalystwx13
Let me start off by saying this was a disappointing season for us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones. Although a total of 15 tropical cyclones developed, none reached major hurricane status and there was no significant damage, except in the case of Hurricane Ingrid. The season even fell below most of the professionals expectations! In contrast, these articles are not disappointing. You see, because the season was lame, we were left with fewer articles and more time to improve them (compare this to the 2012 AHS, for instance). Hurricanehink and TropicalAnalystwx13 are co-nominators. Finally, this will be a WikiCup nomination.--12george1 (talk) 22:44, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
- WHat makes the two storms notable enough to deserve separate articles? Nergaal (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
- What makes them not notable?--12george1 (talk) 17:58, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Outside of hurricanes, I've seen extremely few disasters with sub-10 fatalities and sub-$100k damages with separate articles. Nergaal (talk) 09:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well, there's a general agreement that all tropical cyclones are notable. Named storms all get mentions in a variety of scientific documents, so there are always a bunch of verified independent sources. Andrea, Barry, and Ingrid are all essentially sub-articles. As content forks are allowed, I think they are all legitimate articles, considering I believe the season article would be too long (and overly focused with undue weight) with Andrea and Barry. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:26, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- You're not thinking about it the right way. Think about it like they are sub-articles of the season. 04:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellow Evan (talk • contribs)
- Well, there's a general agreement that all tropical cyclones are notable. Named storms all get mentions in a variety of scientific documents, so there are always a bunch of verified independent sources. Andrea, Barry, and Ingrid are all essentially sub-articles. As content forks are allowed, I think they are all legitimate articles, considering I believe the season article would be too long (and overly focused with undue weight) with Andrea and Barry. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:26, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
- Outside of hurricanes, I've seen extremely few disasters with sub-10 fatalities and sub-$100k damages with separate articles. Nergaal (talk) 09:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- What makes them not notable?--12george1 (talk) 17:58, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- Delegate comment This nomination has been up for a month, and really needs some more discussion to establish a consensus.--十八 21:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support, nice but disappointing season. Quality of articles are great.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 04:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support Season gets a lot hate along weather forums, but it is still GT-worthy. YE Pacific Hurricane 04:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Support The articles are fantastic. --ȸ (talk) 23:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
- Closed with a consensus to promote to Good Topic. - GamerPro64 16:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)