Talk:2002 Atlantic hurricane season

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2002 Atlantic hurricane season article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

2002 Atlantic hurricane season is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 14, 2016.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 19, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
September 19, 2008	Featured article candidate	Promoted
October 26, 2008	Featured topic candidate	Not promoted
May 31, 2012	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
January 22, 2024	Featured topic removal candidate	Demoted
Current status: Featured article

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).

Other basin talkpages (2002): Atlantic - W. Pacific - Central and East Pacific - N. Indian - S. Hemisphere

Image for each storm

I am trying to get an image for each storm, like 2005. I have started uploading ones that aren't on Wikipedia yet, and they are listed below. If you find a better image, feel free to replace it.

Tropical Storm Arthur
Tropical Storm Bertha
Tropical Storm Cristobal
Tropical Storm Dolly- Another image is found here, you decide which is better (I vote 2, but found that afterwards)
Tropical Storm Edouard
Tropical Storm Fay
Hurricane Gustav
Tropical Storm Hanna
Tropical Storm Josephine- Can you find a better image?
Hurricane Kyle

Does anyone have any good images of Bertha or Hanna? Hurricanehink 01:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Forget that, every storm is done. Hurricanehink 14:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot Josephine. Got that too. Hurricanehink 02:32, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good. Nice job! -- RattleMan 01:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Hurricanehink 03:26, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TDs

What about TDs? There was 7 and 14. Don't they deserve a mention? Icelandic Hurricane #12 21:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fancy storm pics

Is there a need for that? It adds a lot of more white space, and doesn't add much. People aren't that lazy that they can't read one paragraph for information. If the information in the infobox doesn't exist, then it should be put into the paragraph. Hurricanehink 22:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the "infobox small" tables? — jdorje (talk) 00:59, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea. IMO, they serve little purpose, considering most of it isn't even seen. What is seen creates excess white space. Hurricanehink 02:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, good points. However it is useful to have the information in an easily available table format. But the one-table-per-storm method is bad for an article that has more than one storm in it. Better would be to have one table for the article showing information about each storm, as 1997 Pacific hurricane season and numerous older AHS articles have. — jdorje (talk) 02:28, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Storm boxes?

Why do some storms, but not all of them have infoboxes? Jamie|C 20:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They weren't finished because we never agreed if they should be there in the first place. Hurricanehink 21:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well we'll have to decide then because it looks weird when some storms have them and some dont. Jamie|C

13:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I vote we get rid of them and add meteorolgical statistics on the bottom, including death and damage totals by area. Hurricanehink 15:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds fine to me. However this decision should be made on the wikiproject page, and then applied to all seasons. — jdorje (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the remaining boxes to neaten up the page, I decided to do this following comparisons with 2003 and 2004 pages. It looks neater to have the boxes, and also follows the same format of 2003 and 2004. Which would mean considerably more work to remove them from the project than to put them into this page.

TD 14 goof

The current satellte pic of TD 14 was taken in July, not in October when the system exsisted. The current picture is a picture of... A SMALL CLOUD! Haha! I'll fix it. Previous, incorrect picture of just a cloud in the carribean, compared to the real pic of the actual depression. Looks more like a depression now doesn't it? →Cyclone1→ 14:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice going...It is good that someone caught that. 209.62.224.245 01:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They actually had an image for this one at NASA Earth Observatory. Good kitty 03:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Season impact

(removed and put into article)

OK, would something like this be useful for the season? Hurricanehink (talk) 00:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? Also can you figure it out to make one for typhoons and super typhoons?Mitchazenia V5.0 01:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. For WPAC, you have so many other things to contend with; different classes and JMA vs. JTWC mainly. I'm not a good computer person, so I probably shouldn't. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt the JMA tracked in 1962.Mitchazenia V5.0 01:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? I was talking about WPAC in general. What does this have to do with 1962? Hurricanehink (talk) 01:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's yooooooooge Good kitty 03:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isidore vs. Lili

I just noticed that, although Isidore has the lowest minimum central pressure for the season, at 934 millibars, the hurricane season infobox has Lili as the season's strongest storm, at 938 millibars, with no mention of Isidore. Although I am aware that Lili's maximum sustained winds were significantly higher than Isidore's, making Lili a Category 4 at its strongest and Isidore only a Category 3, I have also noticed that minimum central pressure is usually the deciding factor when it comes to comparing the strength of different storms in Wikipedia articles. I vote for including both hurricanes in the infobox. What do you guys think is the best thing to do? Ev-Man 23:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point, and I changed it. Strength indicates pressure, and is not synonymous with winds. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2002 Atlantic hurricane season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA, and I should have the full review up within a few hours. Dana boomer (talk) 12:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
~~In the "Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) Ranking" section table, why are Kyle and Hanna not linked?~~

I realize that you have the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale color ratings at the bottom of the page, but would it also be possible to put them near the "Season summary" chart so that it's easier for readers to decipher what all the pretty colors mean?

~~In the first paragraph of the "Seasonal forecasts" section, please use the full version of NOAA first, with NOAA in parentheses, and thereafter use the abbreviation.~~

In the second paragraph of the "Impact" section, you say "The first, Tropical Storm Bertha, made landfall along the Gulf Coast, killing only one person." It may just be me, but the "only" is probably unnecessary, and makes it sounds slightly insignificant that a person was killed. I'm sure this was not your intention, but this was the way that it struck me when I read it.

For a landfall system, one death is considered low, hence the word "only". –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 14:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please be consistent with your translation of 2002 dollars into another year's dollars. In most of the article, you just say that it's 2002 dollars and leave it at that. However, in the second and third paragraphs of the "Impact" section, you have 2002 dollars translated variously into 2006, 2007 and 2008 dollars. Either pick one and stick with it for all of the dollar amounts, or say 2002 dollars and leave it at that throughout the article.

In the last paragraph of the "Aftermath" section, instead of starting out with "Elsewhere", could you start out with "In Canada" or something of the sort, just to be more specific and not leave the reader hanging until they figure out that all of the places you're talking about are in Canada?
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
~~In the "Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) Ranking" section, the last two sentences need a reference.~~

~~The first paragraph of the "Storm names" section needs a ref.~~

Current refs 18, 19, 20, 26, and 30 need publisher information (or at least to be formatted like the rest of the refs with the publisher after the title).

18 still needs one...

Current ref 21 needs an access date.

Still needs one...
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Overall, this is a very well-written, well-referenced and well-illustrated article. I am putting the article on hold for seven days in order to allow you time to deal with the few minor issues I have raised above. If you have questions, you can ask them here or on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 13:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! I fixed everything except for one issues. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 14:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All of the prose tweaks look good. There are still a couple of reference issues that need to be addressed. As soon as those are done, I will pass the article. Dana boomer (talk) 15:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, missed a couple. Done. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 15:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everything looks good, passing GA! Dana boomer (talk) 15:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible TS-July 7 and September 5

http://www.atl.ec.gc.ca/weather/hurricane/storm02.html

These were mentioned in their season write up. I wonder why Miami hasn't looked into these any more? They had sufficient tropical characteristics.Shearwater912 (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2009 (UTC)Shearwater912[reply]

Many years ago, I looked in depth at the July 2002 cyclone, and not long after talked to Jack Beven at NHC about it. During it's genesis it was overtaken by a mid summer cool front offshore the Mid Atlantic states, and therefore could not meet the definition of either a tropical or subtropical cyclone. We were in agreement that the cyclone should be considered a relatively rare "frontal hybrid" cyclone. You can see its evolution beginning with the SAT JUL 6, 0900 UTC surface map at http://www.wpc.ncep.noaa.gov/archives/web_pages/sfc/sfc-zoom.html) AJC3fromS2K (talk) 07:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]