Talk:Hurricane Doria

Hurricane Doria 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
Date	Process	Result
February 23, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 27, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that 1967's Hurricane Doria was described as "one of the most erratic storms ever observed"?

Weather: Tropical / Atlantic 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 articles
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 Atlantic hurricane work group (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Doria (1967)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The fourth tropical cyclone, named storm, and hurricane of the 1967 Atlantic hurricane season, Doria developed on September 8 off the coast of Florida" - I think you could get away with just "the fourth named storm and hurricane", since there weren't too many classified TD's back then (I think). Also, you should specify which coast of Florida

Sounds good. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would specify which state Doria struck in the lede. Also, you should say how it moved south- and southeastward after moving ashore

Specified where it hit, but I left the post-landfall stuff out... the article isn't all that huge, and I don't want to say everything twice. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The storm is estimated to have organized into a tropical depression at 0000 UTC on September 8.[2] At the time, it was situated north of Grand Bahama Island." - both are pretty short sentences. Any way for merger?

I like to variate sentence length to keep the reader's attention sharp and avoid the writing blurring together. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What caused its early erratic motion? (drifting west, accelerating northeast)

No info on this found. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"However, relatively quickly, its forward motion slowed and it once again strengthened" - try rewording the first portion of that sentence. It still trips me up

Removed that part. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"It approached the Mid-Atlantic States with similar a similar intensity, track, and forward speed as the 1933 Chesapeake–Potomac hurricane" - aside from the brain glitch, I totally disagree. The 1933 cane was coming from the southeast and struck North Carolina. Doria came from the east-northeast and struck Virginia

Well, I'm sorry you disagree, but the reliable source(s) say it was similar, and it's a relatively noteworthy fact to include. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"It dissipated on September 21" - can you combine that with another sentence?

The previous sentence is long enough, so I'm included to leave it as-is (see my above comment about sentence length). Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd specify what state Wallops Island is in

Done. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any more impact? It seems pretty scant for a landfalling tropical storm. The only actual damage is - "At Ocean City, Maryland, a boardwalk sustained storm-related damage" ...
Why the link to 1969 Atlantic hurricane season?

Dunno... Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On hold for now. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. Juliancolton (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, my only outstanding concern is there not being that much impact. I'm sure there are more than two stories in Google news that would be useful. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:44, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 February 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Procedural close. Request opened by block-evader. NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Doria (1967) → Hurricane Doria – Only one Atlantic hurricane named Doria. 219.79.250.146 (talk) 01:02, 8 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. SkyWarrior 02:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - A storm named Doria impacted the same region just a few years later, and was much more notable. Too much potential for confusion. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Huh? The target article is currently a redirect to this article, so unless you plan on making it a disambiguation, this move won't create any confusion. Laurdecl ^talk 06:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, yes, that needs to be revisited. If there's no consensus to move here then a set index page should be created. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the target article is a redirect to this article. Laurdecl ^talk 06:19, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2 June 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) —Guan aco 17:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Doria (1967) → Hurricane Doria – Not a block evader on above. Only hurricane to be ever named Doria, however considering TS Doria of 1971 i know that this is not primary topic at all. But, with my rationale on Hurricane Bret (note the TS Bret 1993 is a primary topic to me, really.) i could think that this is really best, though not obvious candidate for moving. SMB99thx XD (contribs) 06:37, 2 June 2017 (UTC)--Relisting. SMB99thx XD (contribs) 12:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose per my comment in the last RM. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:27, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the nominator of this request. SMB99thx XD (contribs) 23:40, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: I added hatnotes to both Hurricane Doria and Tropical Storm Doria to disambiguate, and I've moved both articles to not include the date in the title. Both were redirects without any hatnotes or disambiguation pages, so this satisfies WP:CONCISE without any cost that I can see. If there are issues with this solution let me know. —Guan aco 17:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.