Talk:Category 6: Day of Destruction

Category 6: Day of Destruction has been listed as one of the Media and drama 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
Date	Process	Result
October 4, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
October 4, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 16, 2008.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that though the 2004 miniseries Category 6: Day of Destruction earned CBS the highest ratings of any show during the November sweeps week, it was generally panned by critics?

Current status: Good article

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article has an archived peer review.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Category 6: Day of Destruction/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

From the "Plot" section, is it Lexer, Lexar, or Lexas. All three are used in this section, so consistency is needed.
This sentence is confusing: "During shooting, special effect supervisor Craig Weiss noted that the films with Dennis Quaid were particularly difficult to capture on film due to Quaid's multiple scenes being chased by twisters and surrounded their destructive aftermaths." Should that be "scenes with Dennis Quaid? "Twisters" is too colloquial, so "tornadoes" would be preferable. "surrounded their..." doesn't flow properly. Do you mean "surrounded by"?
"Daily Variety found the film to be full of cliches and side give the appearance" is confusing. What does "side give" mean?
The article mentions that three storms are approaching from the north and south. If one of the three is coming from Las Vegas to Chicago, wouldn't that be from the north, south, and west?

I will place the review on hold to allow for these concerns to be addressed and/or discussed. Any comments or questions can be placed on this page, as I have added it to my watchlist. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All items have been fixed. Can't believe I missed those two sentences. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 18:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good to me. And when you work on an article for that long, it's only natural to let a few typos slip by. It happens to me on almost every article I write, no matter how much proofreading I do. I will promote the article to GA. Great work! If you have a chance, it would be great if you could review an article as well to help reduce the backlog. GaryColemanFan (talk) 23:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awesomeness thanks! And thanks for reviewing so quickly! I was expecting to have to wait weeks. I'll try to get in to do some reviews...I used to do them quite often, but the backlash when I couldn't pass an unqualified got to be too stressful and I stopped for a long while. Came back doing the occasional GAR, but haven't done any GANs in awhile. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some areas in need of improvement

I read the article and was disappointed that there was minimal discussion about the scientific issues with the miniseries. The lead mentions some controversy over it, but there is very little detail about the flaws in the rest of the article. Do category 6 hurricanes exist? I have only heard of a category 5 hurricane in real life. Has Chicago every been hit by a hurricane? Also, I wanted to read more about hurricanes after looking at this article but I had a hard time finding a link to hurricane. Wronkiew (talk) 00:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is minimal discussion because I haven't found any reliable sources discussing the film verses reality. If some can be found, it will be expanded to include that. Category 6 hurricanes are, as far as I know, purely theoretical. I do not think there is any recorded incidence of one. For your second question, Chicago has been hit by the remnants of hurricanes. For a hurricane scenarios as seen in the film (where in the hurricane forms over the great lakes), technically that isn't possible as part of the definition of a hurricane is that its tropical. You might find this article from the NSW interesting as it talks about hurricanes in Michigan and would also relate to chicago[1] and discusses some hurricane like storms that have formed over the great lakes, including "Hurricane Huron". I've added a wikilink to hurricane in the lead to help there. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:05, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other areas that need improvement are the continuity issues in the film. One scene (supposedly from Chicago) of boats being tossed about during the hurricane had palm tress on the shore. Trust me, we don't have palm trees in Chicago. Amusingly, this exact same scene was in Category 7 for a shot of Florida being hit. Other discontinuities include long shots of the Aon center where a nearby building exists in one shot, and is missing in another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.172.134.23 (talk) 14:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Length

"Four-hour miniseries"? 174 minutes is only three hours. 93.136.81.94 (talk) 22:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Category 6: Day of Destruction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]