Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Category 3 Pacific hurricanes/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 28 October 2018 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of Category 3 Pacific hurricanes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Nominator(s): ~ KN2731 {t · c} 06:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's been three months since I started working on this since the idea popped up on the talk page of the tropical cyclone wikiproject. I've finally completed all the entries and cleaned it up so I'm bringing it here. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 06:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from TompaDompa (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] |
---|
Comments
|
Support TompaDompa (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow impressive list! I just have time for one quick comment for now. In the Landfalls section you can delete the word "state" which is repeated a dozen times, as it is not consistent with the rest of the page. Mattximus (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough, removed those. I copied the table format from List of Category 4 Pacific hurricanes, which was why I left them there originally. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 14:04, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all for the comments so far, currently working through those. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 14:04, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @TompaDompa and Mattximus: I've finished working through the issues raised. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 13:03, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Currently, the article states that there were no Category 3 hurricanes recorded prior to 1970. However, this is not true as Hurricane Olivia from 1967 also peaked as a Category 3 hurricane off Baja California. — Iunetalk 19:56, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Goodness, I have no idea how I missed that out! Thanks Iune for the catch. I've added it in and adjusted the relevant statistics accordingly. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 13:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Before 1970, tropical cyclones within the Northeast Pacific were classified into three categories: tropical depression, tropical storm, and hurricane; these were assigned intensities of 30 mph (45 km/h), 50 mph (85 km/h), and 85 mph (140 km/h) respectively.
- If I'm not mistaken, this was a retroactive change in the HURDAT database rather than an operational classification which you may wish to note here. For example, reading the seasonal report for the 1967 season indicates that numerous storms such as Tropical Storm Francene and Hurricane Jewel and Lily all had peak intensities operationally estimated at different values from the current values in the HURDAT database. If you're hunting for a reference for this, I remember reading a paper about the East Pacific hurricane reanalysis which I can search for again if you'd like. — Iunetalk 01:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]- @Iune: if you could kindly provide a link to that paper I'd gladly appreciate it! Scouring countless Google searches isn't working for me this time, only Atlantic-related reanalysis seems to be appearing. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 14:20, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm really sorry for the delay; I had found a reference, only to lose it immediately afterwards. I have the 1967 season summary: Tropical Cyclones in the Eastern North Pacific, 1967 which details the "original" intensities for the storms in the season which is different compared to HURDAT. I couldn't find a source on when the change was made to the "generic" tropical cyclone intensities currently used in the HURDAT database unfortunately—it must have happened sometime in the 1970s or 1980s as far as my digging has revealed, but I'm not sure when. — Iunetalk 00:31, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @KN2731: With regards to the above reference, I feel that including it in the article (along with the retroactive change discussion) is honestly up to you as there is no source explicitly stating when the change was made. I believe that the article is in excellent shape otherwise, and support the nomination regardless of your decision on whether to include it in the article. — Iunetalk 00:36, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Tbh I don't feel like including that the change was retroactive if it can't be sourced... and I would give priority to HURDAT since it is supposed to be the best track after all. But you have my sincere thanks for your help. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 04:29, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Iune: if you could kindly provide a link to that paper I'd gladly appreciate it! Scouring countless Google searches isn't working for me this time, only Atlantic-related reanalysis seems to be appearing. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 14:20, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Quick comment –
In Landfalls, "in" should be removed from "Only in two years ... saw more than one Category 3 hurricane make landfall".Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]- Done ~ KN2731 {t · c} 11:18, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support pending any missing Cat 3 hurricanes according to Iune. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 23:33, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Source review passed, no issues found when I looked through, promoting. --PresN 04:49, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.