Talk:Effects of Hurricane Noel in the United States

Effects of Hurricane Noel in the United States was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 11, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
October 7, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
October 19, 2008	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 14, 2013	Good article nominee	Not listed
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 4, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in the U.S. State of Florida, Hurricane Noel* caused 4 million dollars' worth of beach erosion* (example pictured), including washing away most of a 20 feet (6 m) sand dune?
Current status: Delisted good article

Order of things

Given the preps section is pretty split, I think it'd be better organized to organize the article overall by location, not by preps then impact. That way, the one paragraph of Florida could be in the Florida section, and the one of New England could be in that section. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Effects of Hurricane Noel in the United States/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
Well done.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the Florida section, it would be best if "Florida", "Palm Beach County, Florida", "Miami-Dade", "Broward" are linked once, per here. Same thing goes with Carolinas and Mid-Atlantic and New England sections, link cities, states, highways, etc., just once.
Half-check. In the Florida section, "Florida" is linked twice. Same goes in the Carolinas and Mid-Atlantic section, "North Carolina Highway 12" should be just linked once. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, missed that. Got it. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 14:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
Does Reference 29 cover all this ---> "A few roads were closed, mainly due to flooding and downed trees and tree limbs. Old North Wharf in Nantucket was damaged beyond repair, while numerous small boats were washed ashore. Similarly, a large number of scallops were washed up in a nearby harbor. Overall wind damage was common, including broken windows, structural damage, and substantial movement of objects such as garbage cans, and downed trees"?
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Yep, that reference is good for all that stuff. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 02:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Juliancolton for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

There was a brief discussion about this on IRC, as well as on this article's FAC. There is a lot of great content here, and I don't think it should be off on its own article. Seeing as the main article isn't all that long, I think this can easily fit in there (and not to mention, it's pretty redundant having a separate article considering this only has a few more paragraphs of info). --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:08, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:09, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contrary to popular belief, I think some merges make sense, and this is one of them. This split gathered considerable opposition at the FAC, so it should be undone IMO (particularly since it will allow Noel to be FAC'd more easily). Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 02:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We never did this. Is anyone opposed? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]