Talk:Climate of Houston

Climate of Houston was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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
April 7, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

Houston (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Houston, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HoustonWikipedia:WikiProject HoustonTemplate:WikiProject HoustonHouston

Weather: Tropical / Climate Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Climate task force (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Failed: Fixes needed

Based on the criteria at WP:WIAGA, I have had to fail this article's nomination as a Good Article. If the following fixes are made, then please renominate and it should pass:

Criteria 1 (quality of writing): Needs some copyediting. While the article is sufficiently broad (per criteria 3) it seems jumpy and doesn't flow well. Also, there is a huge section on the summer climate in 1950, and then it stops there? This seems at once excessive and lacking. There are also far too many one-sentance paragraphs that could be fleshed out some. Also, the lead section needs to be expanded some. The lead (see WP:LEAD for more info) should fully summarize the article, several sections in the article aren't mentioned in the lead.
Criteria 2 (accuracy and referencing): A few sections need extra referencing. For example:
- Under Snow and Ice: El nino information is unreferenced.
- Under Spring there is one reference, but several claims made after the reference. If that reference has all of the information, then it should be at the end of the paragraph. If not, the additional claims need to be referenced.
- Likewise, Precipitation seems to have unreferenced claims.
- Information about Hurricane Rita are unreferenced.
- Metrorail information is unreferenced.
Criteria 3 (broadness): Article seems to hit all major topics. I just think it needs to hit them better (see criteria 1 above)
Criteria 4 (NPOV): Looks good
Criteria 5 (stable): Looks good
Criteria 6 (images): Big problem. The lead image has fair use objections onm its image page, and I agree. The tag applied to the image specifically states that it is used to illustrate an object. A scene of Houston is not an object. A comparable image could be taken by any Wikipedian living in Houston to replace this one.

That's about it. If you feel that this review was incorrectly handled, you may ask for remediation at WP:GA/R. If you have any further questions, feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. If the fixes get made, please feel free to renominate. Happy editing! --Jayron32|talk|contribs 02:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Winter is the coolest season in Houston"

Does this strike anyone else as an idiotic sentence? "The coolest season" is the definition of winter. Gzoek 21:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have an excellent point. It has been reworded. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Precip data vs. chart

The article claims May is the rainiest month, but the chart indicates otherwise (June). Is there any way to square these items?

Also, I am putting in a minor edit re TS Allison, based upon the reference cited.

Btw, while air pollution may be an important issue for the city of Houston, it has rather little to do with the Houston's -climate- (absent a fairly extensive discussion of any possible effect of particulates on ground temps). Why is it here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yasha1969 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why The Weather Channel?

Why do people have to use The Weather Channel for climate information? And why use what appears to be part Hobby airport information and part IAH? IAH is Houston's big airport and main weather station. Plus, the record temperatures are not even correct. For instance, at Hobby, the record high for:

September is 108, set in 2000.
The record high for February is 89, set in 1940.
May: 100, 1998.
June: 102, multiple (and it appears, rather than missing a valid record, "104" was just conjured up here, or confused with the 104 recorded at IAH in June 2009).
July: 105, 1939.
October: 97, multiple.
December: 85, 1933.

Record lows:

April: 32, 1940 (I guess just a typo.)
July: 64, 1967 ("45" was measured where???).
August: 60, 1940.
September: 46, 1942.
November: 24, 1938.

Twelve wrong out of 24. Not that it matters, because the TWC source don't tell when their records were set. NWS does though. http://www.weather.gov/climate/local_data.php?wfo=hgx Ufwuct (talk) 20:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Extreme Weather

As this year testifies, Houston was also subject to exceptional drought in 1900, 1950-57, and 2010-2011. That should be included under the Extreme Weather section. http://www.srh.weather.gov/rtimages/hgx/KIAH2011plot.png shows how far behind normal IAH station has fallen currently. Paulsuckow (talk) 21:29, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get an edit in the flood area for the Brazos river as well? Right around June 2016 it burst its banks in many areas outlying Houston, especially in the Rosenburg-Sugar Land area a mere 20 miles from downtown Houston. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.32.214.238 (talk) 04:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit by A.V.: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.224.100.150 (talk) 20:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC) True, but we have to consider the rarity as well as locality. The drought seen in 2011 was very rare, as no year over centuries has ever had drought that bad; only 1789, just one year, came close. The 1900 and 1950s droughts occurred, but over much of the South, and the US, in general.[reply]

Weather Charts

For some reason, the weather charts have been taken out of the page.

- The weather chart for Houston has been altered with incorrect values, and the chart for IAH has been taken out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.224.100.150 (talk) 20:07, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Climate of Houston/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Currently a GA nominate. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 15:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 15:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Climate of Houston. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 13:45, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.30.69.9 (talk) 16:30, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).