Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 1990–91 South Pacific cyclone season/archive1

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 Dabomb87 23:39, 20 August 2010 [1].

Timeline of the 1990–91 South Pacific cyclone season[edit]

Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 1990–91 South Pacific cyclone season/archive1

Nominator(s): Yueof theNorth 00:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC) and Jason Rees[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I feel that it meets FLC standards. This article is written to address comments left at the featured list review for Timeline of the 2003-04 South Pacific cyclone season. Yueof theNorth 00:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Looking good; all minor problems addressed. Ucucha 18:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC) Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Some more things:[reply]

~~Both warning centers designated tropical cyclones with a number and a P suffix with numbers assigned in order to tropical cyclones developing within the whole of the Southern Hemisphere.~~

I changed it to make it clearer which warning centers designated storms with a "P".

I'm sorry I didn't write a proper comment on the sentence; my problem was actually that there's a verb missing ("in order to tropical cyclones").

Changed to say the assigned in numerical order. --Yueof theNorth 15:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification; I hadn't realized it should be read that way. Ucucha 15:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Why is what looks like the alt text for the track map of Joy in a ref?~~

Changed and moved all information about tracks into alt text

In the timeline, why are those exclamation marks and other pieces of punctuation there before the storm names? Also, some of the colors hardly stand out from the background.

The punctuation marks came up in a previous FLC (Timeline of the 2007-08 South Pacific cyclone season [2]) as to distinguish storms for people who are color-blind or cannot see the difference between colors easily.

Could you tell me which color(s) are hard to see on the screen as on my computer, it shows up fine

Thanks for the explanation. Might it be better to use superscript numbers for that (e.g., ¹ for cat. 1, and perhaps ⁰ for tropical depression)? That would make for a more intuitive scheme. The poorly visible colours are for categories 2 and 3, but I was probably just looking at my screen at a weird angle—it's fine now that I'm looking at it another way. It might also be a good idea to use two colors for tropical depression and cat. 1 that differ a little more—they're hardly distinguishable now. Ucucha 15:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ucucha 06:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea with the Superscript numbers, Ive changed the tropical depression colour to the one used for Tropical disturbances in later timelines.Jason Rees (talk) 15:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Super-script does not work in timelines so I added in numbers in paranthesis.

Thanks. The colors for TD and 1 are still nearly the same. The parentheses are a good fix; the only problem is that the right parenthesis for 4 is cut off. Ucucha 15:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ive extended the width out to accommodate the bracket for C4- as for the colours being nearly the same - they look completely different to me as ones a dark blue and ones an aqua. Other than changing the colour between the one used for Depression and Disturbance which i have done we would need a consensus from the wikiproject to change the colours as their the same colours used throughout the project.Jason Rees (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough; changed to support. Ucucha 18:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~Support— The track maps are very dark and difficult to read. Even the larger images in Wiki Commons are extremely dark. Can you possibly provide images with more contrast between the tracks and the background? Also, it is not clear on first glance what land mass is being shown. Although this is not a fatal flaw for the list, it is distracting. --Dan Dassow (talk) 08:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the track maps for the individual storms, I removed the extratropical points which will make it clearer. I unfortunately cannot do anything about the darkness of the image as it is the image used in the track map generator; any change to the image will require the uninstallation and reinstallation of the program. --Yueof theNorth 16:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The track images are now much easier to read. This was my only problem with the list. I've change "Comment" to "Support". --Dan Dassow (talk) 18:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 15:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Lead image can be made much bigger, and there's no reason why you shouldn't. Then we could stand a chance of seeing the detail there!

Edited image to remove extratropical points; making the image easier to see

"This is the period of the year..." you realise you redefined the period from the traditionally accepted "cyclone season" the sentence before?

I'm not sure what you mean, when reading that I think that it build on the previous sentence and says that most storms form between November and April.

I just wondered if you really meant to refer to the traditional season, not this year's particularly odd season (because of Lisa)... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find a link for South Pacific Ocean?

I linked it to Pacific Ocean. However, the part of the South Pacific that TCWC Nadi and Wellington monitored (the "definition" of South Pacific used in this article) was mentioned in a footnote just before this sentence.

"As a result of the impacts caused by Joy and Sina," impacts of both Joy and Sina?

Changed

"160th meridian east " is overlinked in the lead.

De-linked

"It documents tropical cyclone formations, strengthening, weakening, landfalls, extratropical transitions, and dissipations during the season." in this list what is a "strengthening" and a "weakening"? They sound like adjectives to me?

Changed to say strengthenings and weakenings

"1-minute peak" any reason why this isn't "one-minute peak" per our MOS?

Changing

Why is Lisa included in the season if she occurred outside of the season? Is this rare? Should it be noted?

Lisa moved into the South Pacific during the Tropical cyclone year (July 1, 1990 - June 30, 1991). This is uncommon; not rare though, it has happened 15 times since 1970; or about once every 2 2/3 years.

Maybe we need to discuss this in more detail, note how rare it is, because it's way out of the normal year... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? Lisa occured 11 days after the season ended, that is not that far out of the normal year. --Yueof theNorth 19:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remember you're appealing to all-comers here, i.e. people who wouldn't necessarily understand why a storm that occurred 11 days outside the "season" should be included "in the season". The Rambling Man (talk) 19:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not that sure how to word this, should I put in a footnote Tropical Cyclone Lisa is included in this article because it moved into the South Pacific during the 1990-1991 Tropical Cyclone Year (July 31, 1990 to June 30, 1991)?--Yueof theNorth 19:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the consensus would be. This is just my opinion. Perhaps we just leave it for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have worked a note into the lead about the tropical cyclone year before however as it seemed to be confusing to people within the project, If we had to put it in i would prefer it in as a footnote.Jason Rees (talk) 01:15, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any real relevance of the external link to the WMO to this list?

Removed

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Courcelles 23:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Comments

"November 20 * 1200 UTC, (0000 FST, November 25)" 20th and 25th? Let me get my TARDIS... Actually, that's all I saw here. Courcelles 21:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops thanks for spotting that error - ive fixed it now.Jason Rees (talk) 21:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Courcelles 23:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I can find nothing wrong with this. Afro (Say Something Funny) ^{- Afkatk} 19:45, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Afro. Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest FLC} 10:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~ Support –

~~"whilst the NWOC issued unofficial warnings...". "whilst" → "while".~~
~~"Both the JTWC and NMOC designated...". Hyphen needed after NMOC.~~
- One note on this: the hyphen should be unspaced. I'll do this to save time, but please remember for next time. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Reference 2 should have an indication that the link is in PDF format. There's a format= parameter in the cite templates that handles this nicely.~~

Giants2008 (27 and counting) 23:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- All sorted.Jason Rees (talk) 23:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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