Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Maryland hurricanes (1950–1979)/archive4

Add links
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 not promoted by Matthewedwards 22:50, 16 May 2009 [1].

List of Maryland hurricanes (1950–1979)[edit]

Nominator(s): –Juliancolton | Talk 17:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

–Juliancolton | Talk 17:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose and comments. First, why does 1980-present include Washington D.C., but this one doesn't? Second, why does this list even exist? It's rather small, and it could easily be part of a larger time period. Stopping it at 1950 seems like a pretty arbitrary split for the larger "List of Maryland hurricanes" list, which is not yet made for some reason. More importantly, perhaps (which would negate one of my questions), the list is not complete. I see a lot of storms that produced rainfall in the state but were not included. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:28, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of missing storms would be appreciated. A trace of rain is not notable enough for inclusion in my opinion. –Juliancolton | Talk 22:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But you include Isbell in 1964 and Hallie in 1975 for producing light rain. I count 12 tropical cyclones in the rainfall page, which you already use, that are missing from the article. Do you care to comment on any of my other comments? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aiming for each list to encompass a ~30-year period. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) has gone on Wikibreak, so I don't really know what to do with this oppose. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I maintain my original oppose, that several storms are missing. Like I said, you include Isbell in 1964 and Hallie in 1975 with their light rainfall, so the list is not comprehensive if it does not include every known storm in the state. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, a trace of rainfall is not notable enough for inclusion. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And as I said, you include two storms in the list for having very little rainfall. Those 12 missing storms produced as much rain as Hallie or Isbell. It isn't a matter of notability, rather it's a matter of factual accuracy. If you don't include them, then this article fails FL criterion 3a, as the scope is not well-defined. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, I removed Hallie and Isbelle. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What does that accomplish? If the scope of the article is supposed to be any tropical cyclone affecting the state of Maryland, then you're removing legitimate data. Also, of the missing storms, one caused over 4 inches of rainfall, which is more than some of the other storms listed. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:38, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because I'm trying to write an encyclopedic article, not a rainfall database. –Juliancolton | Talk 18:52, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How can you have a comprehensive list of tropical cyclones if you're arbitrarily removing storms that only have rainfall data? All other tropical cyclone list articles like these have the same format. If there is rainfall info known, then it is included. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The prose in hurricane FLs and FAs has been improving; this is great to see. But the issues raised by Hink need to be addressed. Just a few things I noticed.

  • Why link "US state" bumped up against the link to "Maryland", which surely contains a link itself to "US state"? Select the links carefully and they'll stand out more, and attract more clicks. Too much choice ends in fudge.
  • "During the time period"—huh?
  • Any reasons for saying "1955 USD", where it's clear from the example in the lead that money amounts are from the period cited? Why specify US? I'm sure MOSNUM says US and UK currencies are just $ and pound symbols. US is tagged to every amount. And why are some amounts translated into 2007 equivalents (not 2009?), and others not at all?
  • Do we need the histogram as well as the table? They both say the same thing, and really, the amounts are easy to conceptualise. True to that, the deaths below is not histogrammed. Hmmm ... unsure either even needs a table, but I'm willing to be corrected by regulars here on that point. Tony (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

Sources

  • Please link and define abbreviation of NOAA on the first appearance.
  • It's a branch of Unisys, which is fairly reliable in my opinion. Also, the information it cites is uncontroversial. –Juliancolton | Talk 17:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs 4 and 17 seem to be from newspapers. If this is true, they should be in italics. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If we have to have a list of hurricanes for each state why dont we have a general list of all known Maryland hurricanes that are not split off by date. As far as i am aware all of the other countries that we have are a general list of Cyclones that have hit Jason Rees (talk) 18:33, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose After a bit of my own research I found that ten storms (including depressions) were missing from the list. Until they are in, I'm opposing this nomination. Cyclonebiskit 18:57, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One dab found. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Maryland_hurricanes_(1950–1979)/archive4&oldid=1077420964"