Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Vince (2005)

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 02:11, 14 August 2008 [1].

Hurricane Vince (2005)

Nominator(s): Plasticup ^T/C

This article is short but comprehensive. It passed GA ages ago and with a little work I think I have brought it up to FA standard. It hasn't been peer reviewed, but as it is short I should be able to work out any issues that may arise. Plasticup ^T/C 23:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support—well written like most articles from this legendary WikiProject—I notice only a handful of minor glitches. I'll see if I can spot anything. I'm sure others can find other issues, but nothing seems as window-shattering as, say, a downburst from a tornadic supercell. Or as deadly as the storm surge of a cat5 hurricane... — Deckill er 04:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I made a few tweaks. There are still a few things that stand out to me, but I believe they are subjective. Someone with more experience with the more technical aspects of the MoS should check dates and hyphens and whatnot. — Deckill er 04:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Did you have something specific in mind? Plasticup ^T/C 11:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Quick question: In "the Instituto Nacional de Meteorología (INM) issued a bulletin that warned of a 40% chance of flood," should "flood" be "flooding"? I wasn't sure about that. — Deckill er 04:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yep, it's flooding. I've changed it accordingly. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 05:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks. My English gets all screwy when I am reading Spanish. After re-reading that section I have also split up the opening sentence. Plasticup ^T/C 11:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The images check out, and I fixed a dead link. My only question is about Image:Vince Portugal Radar.jpg. It is part of a document covered by {{PD-USGov-NOAA}}, as it is is in the Tropical Cyclone Report cited in the article and in the image description page. However, the TCR attributes it to the Portuguese Institute of Meteorology, for which I cannot find a copyright statement. What do we do in this case? Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 05:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the information on US government web pages is in the public domain unless specifically annotated otherwise. The NOAA document credits the Portuguese group but does not specify a special copyright situation. Plasticup ^T/C 10:41, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link I was looking for: The information on government servers are in the public domain, unless specifically annotated otherwise, and may be used freely by the public. Plasticup ^T/C 12:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, support. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 04:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - "Hurricane Vince was one of the most unusual hurricanes to develop in the Atlantic basin." Are you saying one of the most unusual ever? If you are implying in 2005, then are you saying it was one of the most unusual in 2005, along with other unusual hurricanes in 2005? —Mattisse (Talk) 23:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means one of the most unusual ever. It developed over water too cold for hurricanes, strengthened in conditions that usually forbid strengthening, and made landfall in an area that one other hurricane maybe ever reached. Are you worried that the sentence is unclear, or that the claim is not supported later in the article? Plasticup ^T/C 23:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To me the sentence is unclear. It is the lead sentence, so I think it should be very clear. If it is one of the most "unusual" ever, then that is a big claim in the first sentence so perhaps it would help if you clarified the time frame (do you mean since 1842?) and also defined "unusual" (because it landed on the Iberian Peninsula?) How long does the data base of hurricanes go back? Are there not many "unusual" hurricanes, depending on how you define "unusual"? (I am a fan of your hurricane articles, in general, as you must be aware.) —Mattisse (Talk) 00:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation comes in the second sentence. I have expanded it a little to clarify what made the hurricane so unusual: it developed further to the northeast than any hurricane in recorded history and the waters over which it formed were considered too cold for tropical development. "Recorded history" goes back a while, maybe 100–150 years. The data gets worse the further back you go, but as far back as 150 years there are decent records that would probably have captured similar storms had they existed. Its exceptional landfall is also mentioned later in the lead, if one needs more evidence of the hurricane's unusualness. Plasticup ^T/C 00:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the current wording. Adding "ever" would be both redundant and potentially inaccurate. — Deckill er 04:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Small confusion: "Vince was the 20th named tropical cyclone and twelfth hurricane of the extremely active season." Since hurricane wikilink redirects to tropical cyclone, how is it that Vince is the 20th named tropical cyclone and 12th named hurricane? —Mattisse (Talk) 18:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Named storm = tropical storm or stronger; I've added a couple of links to clarify. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 19:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A hurricane is a type of tropical cyclone, as are tropical storms, typhoons, and super-typhoons. Plasticup ^T/C 15:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support, with one minor comment. In the sentence, At the time there was still uncertainty as to whether Vince was tropical or subtropical, but the forecasters of the NHC later conceded that Vince had formed as a subtropical storm and evolved into a tropical storm before it was named., it might be best to specify that it was Richard Knabb who made that assumption. Other than that, good work! Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 02:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knabb hints at it in the first advisory but it is Franklin who pins it down in the TCR. Given that several forecasters worked on the storm I am a little hesitant to attribute it to any one of them, but if I were to pick one it would be the author of the final Tropical Cyclone Report. Plasticup ^T/C 13:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I hadn't noticed that. In that case, it's better to leave it as it is. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 13:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comments~~ Support
- The biggest thing (which almost makes me want to oppose) is the first paragraph in Records and naming not being sourced. What does most northeastern forming mean? I know there is a hidden comment which points to the talk page, but I don't quite buy that logic. It would be nice if there was a source and explanation for that part a little more.
- Also, in the records section, it says a storm in 1842 may have struck the Iberian Peninsula, even though the lede says Vince was the first tropical system to do so since 1842. It'd be nice to just pick a consistant method throughout the article.
- One more thing about the lede. I greatly disagree with the usage of most unusual in the opening sentence, as that is very subjective. It's the same reason we don't use notable, as others may think it was not so unusual. Is there a better sentence you could use?
- All in all, though, the article looks great. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am citing HURDAT for the information on northerly forming and easterly forming storms, and I am removing the "most northeasterly" claim. I was always a bit skeptical about the way that tidbit had been generated and I think the article is better off without it. This site appears to verify the claim that is the the most northeasterly forming storm, but I don't know about their reliability. It also doesn't define how northeasterly-ness is measured.
The 1852 ambiguity is cleared up, in the sense that the conflict in the literature is fairly represented. Two authoritative sources are saying two different things, so the best we can do is acknowledge the discrepancy.
Regarding "most unusual" in the lead, the NHC refers to its unusual location, and the fact that it is the only tropical storm to hit the Iberian Penisula (for several generations, at least) warrants a mention. I don't have a problem with using a superlative there, but as two reviewers have mentioned that sentence I'll soften it a little. Plasticup ^T/C 16:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I support now. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. I wasn't able to check the non-English sources. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This might have been ready for promotion except for the sentence fragment just left in the first paragraph; please consider having Deckiller revisit to check all prose changes made since his support. Also, why are quotes in italics (see WP:ITALICS). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:54, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed those two thing and will read through it one more time before asking Deckiller to take another look. Plasticup ^T/C 15:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made a couple more (mostly cosmetic) edits, and I see that you have already asked Deckiller to help us with a copyedit. Hopefully he can give some more of his usual top-notch feedback. Plasticup ^T/C 15:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.