Talk:Hurricane Debbie (1969)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Debbie (1969)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

The issue I see preventing GA is mainly one of referencing. References 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 12, and 13 are directing wikipedia users to the wrong place (the overarching storm wallet scanning project page rather than the individual discussions referenced). Also, unlike the other storm pages, there is no information regarding whether or not this storm name was retired and/or used again...this information needs to be added. I'm placing the article on hold for the usual week so the issues can be resolved. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer: Thegreatdr (talk) 16:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I've pointed the public advisories to specific links, and added the naming info (albeit without a source). Do you know any citation I can use to back up the lack of retirement and subsequent/prior uses of the name? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

List of historic tropical cyclone names should have refs which concern changes in the naming lists, if Debbie with this spelling was not used again. Our usual NHC link for retirement could suffice if you're looking for a source for it not being retired, because if it was not, it will not be mentioned on that page. As for whether or not the name was used before or since, HURDAT works fine. Thegreatdr (talk) 10:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Very good. I'm passing the article. Congratulations! Thegreatdr (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. :) –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Retired?

This suggests the name was retired, but I've never seen anything else to suggest it. I just thought I'd bring it up. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

It's the first I've heard of it. In order to place such information in the article, we'd need a more original source (NHC) to state it, since we're 42 years removed from the event. Newspaper info shouldn't trump NHC, since they are the RSMC, merely augment it. I know the 10-year rotating hurricane list was enacted in the early 1970s (all the lists weren't used before the transition to the current set of six rotating lists in 1979), which would have explained Debbie's disappearance. Ever since Debby appeared on the list, it was unlikely Debbie would be placed on them as well. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:34, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Could it be a case of Debbie being retired because of the 1957/1964 one? The 1961 one seems to off at least done some damage.Jason Rees (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, NHC has been wrong too, and we can't forget about the inconsistency with Gracie (and Greta too). As far as I can imagine, name retirement wasn't that special back in those days (and possibly isn't now... I do think us weather geeks put too much emphasis on it). I remember reading how when they retired Lili, they thought Laura 71 was retired. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:47, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

NHC is celebrating its 44th anniversary this year. Any hurricane information/reports (outside of HURDAT) older than that (1967) was likely from NMC (HPC's predecesor), the United States Navy, the Air Force, the Department of Agriculture, or the United States Signal Corp if you go back into the 19th century. It's no wonder there have been issues with storms being retired before 1967. It's no coincidence that their TD database dates from 1967. The press has been known to misquote meteorologists. They quoted me a hurricane specialist when I was a 19 year old summer aide in 1992, which got some chuckles from my co-workers. That's the only explanation I'd have for Debbie's retirement. It was swept out to sea by Camille, which is the most memorable aspect for this storm for me. I did have to extend the extratropical portion of its track to northeast of Great Britain when fleshing out the CLIQR database/our working version of the extended best track database last year. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:57, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hurricane Debbie (1969). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tracks1851to2008_atl_reanal.txt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110104030026/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1969.pdf to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1969.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110525200825/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1972.pdf to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1972.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 22:18, 6 April 2017 (UTC)