Jump to content

Talk:1957 Pacific hurricane season

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article1957 Pacific hurricane season has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 6, 2010Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:1957 Pacific hurricane season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Before I submit a review, I need to ask you something about the length of the Pacific hurricane season. Have you looked up whether or not there is a reference for the length of the Pacific hurricane season in 1957? This came up in the Atlantic season articles, and were we surprised to learn that the length of the Atlantic hurricane season (as they defined it) varied a bit between the 1930s and 1960s, before settling into the modern definition. If you haven't looked for a reference for that line of the article, do so. It is possible that the Navy never defined the dates of hurricane seasons when they had responsibility for the eastern Pacific, prior to the formation of the Eastern Pacific Hurricane Center. If they did not, we need to be generic about when the hurricane season is, because specific dates would need a reference. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Thegreatdr (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what the "official" season was defined as then. I changed it to just the months to be more general. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 13:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It still contained the offical word in there. I made the wording much more general, and took out the word "official" since there are no references for officially defined hurricane seasons that far back in time. I'll start the review shortly. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm passing the article. The wording looks fine, the wikilinks check out, and the references exist. Congratulations! Thegreatdr (talk) 14:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]