Talk:1935 Jérémie hurricane

1935 Jérémie hurricane 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.
Review: July 2, 2014. (Reviewed version).

A fact from 1935 Jérémie hurricane appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 June 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a river in Honduras swelled 15 meters (50 feet) above its normal level during torrential rains from a hurricane in 1935?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1935 Jérémie hurricane.

Wikipedia

Weather: Tropical / Atlantic Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Atlantic hurricane work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Haiti Low‑importance

	Haiti portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Haiti, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Haiti-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HaitiWikipedia:WikiProject HaitiTemplate:WikiProject HaitiHaiti articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comment

In the article about 1935 Jérémie hurricane is stated that "The flood left 800 families homeless in Chamelecón,[23] where the Ulúa River rose some 50 ft (15 m) from its normal height". The problem is that Chamelecón is a zone near San Pedro Sula and the only river near the Chamelecón area is the Chamelecón river and not the Ulúa river as the article states. The Ulúa river is about 40 km away from Chamelecón. You can consult any map of San Pedro Sula to check this. Thank you for your time. [Comment made by Richard the strong king, elsewhere; moved by me. Drmies (talk) 05:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)][reply]

Thanks for moving that here Drmies.

The source says this: "The river Ulua innundated the towns of Chamelecon, Choloma, and Progreso. It was officially reported that the river rose 50 feet in Chamelecon." I just checked a map and the Ulua appears to be about 10 miles from Chamelecon, though it does run on the west side of El Progreso and relatively close to Choloma. It could be that in the remote countryside of 1935 Honduras, the towns were sprawling and lacked any real boundaries, or that Chemelecon was the most identifiable spot at the time, so the observer picked the nearest significant town. Maybe something got lost in translation, like "a river in the Ulua drainage basin" somehow turned into "the Ulua River" in print. Not quite sure how to deal with this. Richard the strong king, thoughts? – Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's possible that it was a tributary of the Ulua. Can't the original source be looked at again?♦ Dr. Blofeld

Well here's the relevant part of the newspaper article. I checked the archive I was using again, and it's the only source that mentions the 50 ft figure for the Ulua, though several other sources say the river flooded Chamelecon. shrug – Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:18, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

← Well, I've reworked the offending sentence to make fewer definitive statements, while still agreeing with the source. It's possibly a bit weaselly now, but I'd rather leave readers to draw their own conclusions than force questionable info down their throats. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1935 Jérémie hurricane/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 12george1 (talk · contribs) 05:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Juliancolton! I am going to review this Good article nomination tonight. I can't remember the last time I reviewed one of your articles, so I think this is overdue :P My issues with this article are listed below.--12george1 (talk) 05:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see there was an issue mentioned on the talk page. Was that resolved? I'm busy reviewing this article, so it's tl;dr.
I tried to resolve it, anyway. You're the GA reviewer, decide for yourself. ;) – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"over the southwestern Caribbean Sea, the storm would proceed to strike eastern Jamaica and " - Wikilink "strike" to Landfall (meteorology)
k. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The hurricane—a Category 1 at its peak—completed an unusual reversal of its path on October 23," - I think you should mention the Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale here.
Well, it's already linked there and mentioned further down in the article, and like I said, I try to keep the lead as concise as possible, with minimal drawn-out modifiers. Can do if needed though. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Weakened by its interaction with land, the storm soon regained strength and made its final landfall near Cabo Gracias a Dios in Honduras on October 25." - Land interaction with where? You mention this, then that the storm re-strengthened and made landfall after that. So it might be good to clarify the issue I stated.
Rejiggered. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"where, on October 17, a broad and immature low pressure system was noted." - Wikilink low pressure area
Relinkered. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"However, contemporary reanalyses of the storm have determined that it organized into a tropical depression on October 18." - Shouldn't "reanalyses" be reanalysis?
Reanalyses is the plural of reanalysis, so it was deliberate. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Any aftermath for Honduras?

Anything useful/notable I found is already in the article. I think I might have come up with a couple generic lines about how the government is trying to help its people, etc., but with no specifics or follow-ups at hand, I figured it was best to leave that stuff out. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No url for reference #10? How about you add something like this?
Added. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, good job overall! :) I look forward to passing this soon and listing it as a Good Article.--12george1 (talk) 05:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I am now going to pass this article and list it as a Good Article. Congratulations,--12george1 (talk) 16:18, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A-class discussion

It appears the article is close to A-class. Here are some comments that I thought could help along its way.

"was an abnormal and highly destructive tropical cyclone" - something about that doesn't ring well to me. I'd avoid the "abnormal" part, since that's kinda subjective, and you explain later why it was abnormal.
"the storm would proceed" - why the "would"? It'd be better if it remained in active past tense, so - "the storm proceeded"
"fruit growers on the island sustained about $2.5 million in losses" - we usually specify in the lead what year's currency we use. I notice you don't do it in the article.
"Four people died on the country" - "on" or "in"?
"The depression drifted toward the east, turning north-northeastward as it strengthened into a tropical storm." - when"?
"The system brushed Cuba's Cape Cruz and deteriorating" - this should be "deteriorated" per paralleism
"The cyclone likely dissipated on October 27." - where?
"and Saint Thomas, Portland, and Saint Mary parishes" - your call, but I think "the parishes of Saint Thomas..." has a better ring to it to identify them all as parishes
"limiting the receipt of information" - ehh, interesting wordage here, but I'm not sure it works best. It's a little... odd
I didn't change this, as it's valid wording, and I don't think we should necessarily be scared of colorful language. I'll change it if I have to, but I'm kind of proud of how creative I was. :) – Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:11, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The flood left 800 families homeless in Chamelecón." - how come this sentence appears between two sentences that specify the flood depth?
"as observed about 140 mi (230 km) upstream of its mouth" - not sure if "of" or "from" its mouth is best
As I see it, if you substituted "upstream" for, say, "northeast", it would be correct to use of. It's being used more as a directional point of reference than a hydrological term. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:11, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are redlink categories

All in all, good writing, a good read! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Everything else is done. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:11, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support then! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:42, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - Dank (push to talk)

"There were reports of": I'll defer to you on this, but at MilHist we like to limit "there were reports of" to cases where we're suggesting that we're not sure if the reports were true ... if we actually believe the reports, we just say what they said. WP:WORDS discusses this IIRC. - Dank (push to talk) 23:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I copyedited the article per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. Great job. - Dank (push to talk) 23:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Why are you using Easy Hurdat as opposed to HURDAT itself.Jason Rees (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To what is a subscription required? - please add |via=Newspapers.com to each of the references.Jason Rees (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a fan of the death/damage totals by country table being cited, by the | colspan = 9 | Sources cited in text. sicne that doesnt make it obvious where the totals come from and can be easily removed accidentally.Jason Rees (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]