Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1997 Pacific hurricane season/Archive 1
Self nom. It has PD images, detailed information on every cyclone, and over 70 inline cites. Way better than any other Pacific season article. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 23:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
- Pretty good, but can you deal with these issues.
- Severly ration the use of 'ibid' reference citations. Some sentences have three reference numbers, all to the same source. One at the end of the sentence should be enough. You might go further by allowing us to assume that most or all of the info in a whole paragraph comes from the one source, with a single citation at the end of the para. That's your call; it depends on each case. Consistently one space or none before each reference number.
- Rather than opening with a bland statement of the dates of the season, can you engage the readers more effectively by characterising the season—was it a particularly bad one? Was it unusual in other ways? (I'd like to know right at the start why you chose this particular season, and I'd like to be able to place the Pacific hurricanes in the larger context. Some big statements would capture our attention at the start: major climatic phenomenon for a number of countries in Central and North America??? Maybe introduce the scale before you cite a Category 5 storm. Many readers won't be familiar with these categories. I wonder whether there are some graphical representations of the number of storms and their severity for each season, for example. That might be good after the lead, before we focus on this particular season.
- The subtitles for each storm: they're kind of big and black, and break up the flow. Can you experiment with less dramatic formatting for them? (Try one level lower in the hierarchy of headings?) Tony 06:56, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- I toned down the use of inline cites. There are now a lot fewer.
- The bland opening is the same one used for every other article on every other hurricane (Atlantic or East Pacific) season. If you insist, I could change it, but it would be different from every other season article. I also removed the first reference to the scale. The map in the infobox colour-codes storm tracks in the East Pacific based on whether they are remnants, depressions, storms, or hurricanes.
The subtitles for each storm are the same size as in other season articles. For the sake of consistency and standardization, I am not going to change their size.Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 21:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Object – this is a list. Nominate it in WP:FLC instead. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:21, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- It is sort of hard to write an article about a tropical cyclone season without having a list of storms and names. If other people insist this is a list, I will remove this nomination and nominate it there, even though I think it is better as a featured article. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 21:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- It is a list, and there's hardly any prose to justify its inclusion here. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- It is sort of hard to write an article about a tropical cyclone season without having a list of storms and names. If other people insist this is a list, I will remove this nomination and nominate it there, even though I think it is better as a featured article. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 21:26, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Unsure why you keep justifying things by comparing this article to others on hurricanes. This is an improvement process, and might set new standards for the others too.Tony 02:51, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- I rearranged the lead to make it more attention grabbing.
- I changed the headings to use four equals signs.Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 19:46, 26 October 2005 (UTC)