Talk:Hurricane Hector (2018)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hurricane Hector (2018) 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

Hurricane Hector (2018) 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.

Hurricane Hector (2018) is part of the 2018 Pacific hurricane season series, a featured 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.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 31, 2023.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 12, 2018	Articles for deletion	Kept
October 28, 2018	Good article nominee	Listed
October 26, 2020	Featured article candidate	Promoted
June 10, 2021	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

Weather: Tropical / Eastern Pacific / Western Pacific / 2018 FT TF 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 Pacific hurricane work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific typhoon work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the 2018 Featured Topic task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Spoken Wikipedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken 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.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia articles

Copy Editing Discussion

Could someone please clarify what the issues are in this article? I honestly saw very few spelling/grammatical mistakes when I checked it. I didn't really see much in terms of flow problems either. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 17:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC) |- wait where did u find this out Derpdadoodle (talk) 00:25, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New picture

Can someone please get a new picture for this storm? The picture is seriously outdated. Brandontracker (talk) 1:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

im on it. Derpdadoodle (talk) 19:47, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Subsections: Yes or no?

I have noticed we are fighting about whether or not to have subsections in this article. Personally, with the way the merge proposal is going, we should have subsections as it appears the article will be kept. The subsections will allow editors to write and readers to read about a specific aspect of the meteorological history. It would work much better with them. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 19:23, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, for now since the storm is still active. Wait til it dies when this can better be discussed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 19:25, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since Hector is now dead, we should start discussing subsections again. I personally think that it would make it better. Grammarguruguy (talk) 16:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I could see there being 4 subsections right now. One for the formation, EPAC/strengthening, CPAC/peak intensity, and WPAC/decline and dissipation. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 22:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think they should be titled by event (i.e. "Formation") rather than by basin. Grammarguruguy (talk) 03:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disgree with the need for subsections, since the MH would just end up as being even more bloated.Jason Rees (talk) 05:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What I don’t see is how dividing the MH into subsections would cause bloating. The division would make it easier for readers to access and editors to edit. New content to make each section bigger would not be needed, and it doesn’t seem like dividing would hurt any aspect of the article. Grammarguruguy (talk) 15:37, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that there's enough content for subsections right now. I believe that there should be a Genevieve-like expansion on its meteorological before thinking on subdivisions. ABC paulista (talk) 16:13, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Hector (2018)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Derpdadoodle (talk · contribs) 14:30, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comments

Hello. I would like to review Hurricane Hector (2018) and conclude if it is GA criteria. DerpieDerpie:D 14:39, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

???

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): 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:
· · ·

other comments

English is on spot.
Great lead
confirm image captions, had some confusion with peak image
impact image possible?
that's all!

DerpieDerpie:D 16:22, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

IN CONCLUSION

After I have seen plausible evidence of this article, I am proud to conclude that therefore, in my opinion, this article should be turned into a good article. DerpieDerpie:D 16:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A-class

Hurricane Hector (2018) A-class review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nominator(s): Noah^Talk 22:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, I need someone who would be willing to review four articles for A-class over an unknown time period. Please note that Hector and Walaka both did not receive comprehensive good article reviews (I was a new user when they were just passed without much of a review). Hence the reason why I have completely rewritten Hector and am beginning to rewrite Walaka. Noah^Talk 22:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.