Talk:Hurricane Gordon (2000)

Hurricane Gordon (2000) 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.

Hurricane Gordon (2000) is part of the 2000 Atlantic hurricane season series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 2, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed
February 14, 2014	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

United States: West Virginia Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	West Virginia portal This article is supported by WikiProject West Virginia (assessed as Low-importance).

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).
	The possible merging of this article has been discussed by editors of the WikiProject.

Merge

This isn't notable enough, and not enough impact to warrent a storm article. Long storm histories only make it seem longer. I vote for a merge. Hurricanehink 15:39, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The impact section is decent...this article could stay if it were fixed up. Although the storm was not particularly notable. The writing is atrocious however, starting with the first sentence which is blatantly wrong. Elsewhere the article is rife with bad spelling and bad grammar. Jdorje 18:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected some but not all, you need to point out what errors I made when writing this article because I found little when I looked at it. Storm05 18:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just looking at the impact section, over half of the sentences contain an error. And there's still the first sentence of the intro. Jdorje 19:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This patient could live with extensive surgery. It killed the same number of people as Keith later that year. The writing is just a nightmare, I'm sorry. I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings but come on. -- §Hurricane ERIC § archive -- my dropsonde 04:32, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the 23 Guatemala deaths may have occurred while the storm was just a tropical wave, and thus are not attributed to Gordon. Even with 24 deaths, it would be 1 short of the cutoff necessary to get on the NHC's deadliest-hurricanes list, below which I don't think deaths alone can justify the article. Based on the mediocrity of the article and lack of damage...I change my vote to merge. — jdorje (talk) 00:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did some cleanup, just to let you guys know. íslenska hurikein #12_(samtal) 14:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made major changes (cleaned it up a lot and copyedited it), I think we can keep it. Chacor 04:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, good work. It could use some preparations and more impact before being upgraded to B class. If possible, could the impact section be split up by area (have a section for Latin America, a section for Florida, and a section for Carolinas)? They are split up already, but not into their own sections. Hurricanehink (talk) 13:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead refs

References 5, 10, and 12 are dead. Replacements need to be found if the information is going to be left intact in the article. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Gordon (2000)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheAustinMan (talk · contribs) 18:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello George! I will be reviewing this article. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 18:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Make sure your uses of "Yucatan" in the lead have an accented a → "Yucatán"
Link frontal boundary to weather front.
"Gordon brought moderately storm surge..." → "Gordon brought moderate storm surge..."
"Overall, Gordon caused $10.8 million (2000 USD)^{[nb 1]}..." → "Overall, Gordon caused $10.8 million (2000 USD)^{[nb 1]} in damages..."

Fixed all of the above--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meteorological history

In the picture of TD 11's wind radii, should it be "wind radius" in the caption or "wind field," since there are multiple contoured areas.

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would link 'computer model' to something suitable, like computer model or numerical weather prediction.

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The developing system moved slowly northwestward across the northern Yucatán Peninsula. Later that day, the depression moved inland over the Yucatán Peninsula." So... the depression crossed the peninsula twice?

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...though a few computer models forecast for the depression..." forecast → forecasted

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...forecast track was sifted further east..." I think you mean shifted.

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Link extratropical cyclone.

Done--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a neat radar image in the MH, but which one is Gordon? The mass of rain over Florida or the organized cluster of storms over South Carolina? If it was the one over SC, then the caption could say 'Extratropical remnants of Gordon...' If it was the one over Florida, perhaps you could try cropping the image?

Gordon could have been both pieces, since it fell apart rather quickly after moving inland.--12george1 (talk) 20:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Preparations

"The Florida Division of Emergency Management in Tallahassee made a mandatory evacuation in Hernando County," I think instead of 'made' you should say 'issued an order for a...' since you don't 'make' evacuations.

You're right, I don't "make" evacuations, but Chuck Norris does. lol Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...while voluntary evacuations are called for..." → "...while voluntary evacuations were called for..."

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The Chevron Corporation..." I think you don't need 'the' or 'corporation' in this case, since you mentioned it earlier.

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Carnival's Sensation..." → "Carnival Sensation..."

Fixed, and link, even though you didn't ask--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

Link C-MAN to Coastal-Marine Automated Network.

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You could link "Tampa metropolitan area" to Tampa Bay Area.

I guess I could, but I did!--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Link Coquina Beach.

No, that article is for the beach in North Carolina, not Florida--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"... and twenty-four nearby homes." What's with the sudden use of word form?

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...with spotter reports and radar estimates indicating over 8 inches (200 mm) in Georgetown." I know you mention heavy rainfall earlier in the sentence, but I think it would be useful to indicate '8 inches (200 mm) of rain.'

It says "heavy rainfall to South Carolina" earlier in the sentence--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...while according newspaper accounts," You're missing the word 'to.'

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"...standing water in excess of 2–3 feet (0.61–0.91 m) in many areas." You say excess, but then you provide a range with a maximum limit. Was it in excess of that range, or did standing water only fall in that range?

It was in excess of that range--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything from Virginia other than rain totals and a few high water and overflow reports?

Well, Gordon was a weak system by then, so there wouldn't be much else other than rainfall, which wasn't particularly heavy.--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"In Delaware, precipitation totals at Newark and New Castle Airport reached 1.82 inches (46 mm), respectively." You provide one value and say respectively. Alternatively, you could say "...totals at Newark and New Castle Airport both reached..."

Fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Every external link with the exception of "NHC (NOAA) Gordon," "Sky Chaser.com," "Hurricane Gordon Report," and "Hurricane Gordon" is a dead link. You could fix that.

I could, but I won't. JK--12george1 (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguations

Dablinks found the following disambiguations on the article:

I fixed--12george1 (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That should be it for now. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 18:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Everything should be good now, except for a few places above.--12george1 (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like my comments have been fixed, and where things were not changed reasons were justifiable. Great work, will pass! TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 21:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]