Talk:Hurricane King

Hurricane King 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 King is part of the 1950 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 1, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
January 28, 2011	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good 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).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[tropical cyclone scales#Atlantic Ocean|major hurricanes]]

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Todo

Complete it, I guess? Hurricanehink 02:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I surely hope there's more to come. At this stage it would take much more work to make it into a workable article than is justified. — jdorje (talk) 02:29, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the storm, based on its price tag and importance in Florida hurricane history, could stay, with extensive work done (almost a complete redo). Hurricanehink 02:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To the original author: look at Category:FA-Class_hurricane_articles for sample articles, and try to make the article look like that. It needs an infobox, pictures, categories, sections. — jdorje (talk) 02:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well i attempted to start the hurricane king page, thanks for helping me with it, it is an important hurricane to the hisotry of florida--HurricaneRo 03:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC) can someone add a picture of kings track and a picture of the storm please--HurricaneRo 03:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add the storm track, but due to how long ago it was, there's likely no pictures of it. HurricaneRo, you still have a lot of work to do if this article is to stay alive. Hurricanehink 03:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congradulations!, you beat me to the Hurricane King Article. Storm05 17:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who did? -- Juliancolton (talk) 21:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category 3 or 2?

According to the NHC best track, King was a 105 mph Category 2 at landfall. This can be seen in King's track map, which clearly shows a Category 2 Miami landfall. However, the MWR does list 120 mph in the city. What should be done about this? Hurricanehink 21:18, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

im not sure?? maybe we should just right it was a cat two atlandfall and is believed to have been a cat.3--HurricaneRo 00:00, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be best to say that there was uncertainty, because it says [[1]] in the AOML archives that there were sustained winds of 122 mph reported in Miami, well above the category 3 threshold, even though the NHC archives (which I can't find for King, does anyone have the link?) say 110 mph. I tend to have issues with the Unisys hurricane archives which are the only ones I can find that say it was a category 2 at landfall. They are notoriously inaccurate. --Runningonbrains

There is no uncertainty. The One and Only source is the best track data; the only problem is in interpreting it since there are various forms of it lying around. The best track list of U.S. hurricanes does indeed show it was a cat3 at landfall. The 6-hourly dataset does seem to conflict with this, but it is less reliable (as with Hurricane Andrew) because it only goes at 6-hour intervals. — jdorje (talk) 03:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good link to have :adds to favorites: Runningonbrains 19:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I used an NHC page that listed the strongest landfalls, and it says King made landfall as a Category 3. The page is in the article. Hurricanehink 03:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

Should the Hurricane King (1950) article be redirected here? Hurricanehink 18:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe so. Also, this sentence is confusing to me: "King was a very small hurricane, as nearby Camaguey recorded winds of around 65 mph." Is this supposed to be the size of the hurricane? If this sentence is "correct", then it's not a hurricane, because it has 65 mph winds, unless he meant 65 knots, inwhich case it is. -- RattleMan 20:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It shows that the city, which was relatively nearby, only recorded winds of around 65 mph when the storm was actually a compact, powerful hurricane. I'll go and redirect it. Hurricanehink 20:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

severe flooding?

It says here that "severe flooding" occurred in St. Petersburg, where the water was "ankle deep". Now, to me, that is minor flooding. Am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Runningonbrains (talk • contribs)

Very true. I'll fix it. Hurricanehink 20:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement?

The article says that "King" was not retired following this storm. However I'm not sure if theres any point in saying that, I mean could King have been retired at all?--Nilfanion (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All storm articles have that, so I just thought I'd say it. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Y E ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:24, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year. This is a great article, but I have a few comments.

"Hurricane King was the severest hurricane to strike Florida since the 1926 Miami hurricane."severest" should be changed to "worst" IMO.
- But that is the wording that the weather bureau says. Saying "worst" doesn't mean anything. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"The cyclone formed in the western Caribbean Sea on October 13, and initially moved northeastward, slowly strengthening." When did King become a hurricane?
- I don't think it's that important for the lede. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"It was subsequently determined that the depression had already attained tropical storm status by October 13" no need for "subsequently" IMO.
- Agreed. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"According to the Atlantic hurricane database, Easy intensified further over land to winds of 120 mph (195 km/h);[1] however, Hurricane Hunters indicated maximum winds of only 100 to 105 mph (160 to 165 km/h) by the time the hurricane emerged into the Florida Straits"
- Fixed mention of Easy. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Hurricane King made landfall on downtown Miami, Florida" remove "hurricane"
- May I ask why? Saying just "King" so many times gets old IMO. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"As the structure deteriorated, the winds diminished along the southern and western side of the storm, although winds gusted to hurricane force in many locations in eastern coastal Florida" "structure" sounds like a building was destroyed,so if I where you, i'd change it to "storm"
- I just removed it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Losses to the citrus crop were considered better than initially anticipated,[10] and overall, the citrus crop damage totaled about $3 million,[7] with 2.5 million boxes destroyed.[11]" You might want to split that sentence into two.
- Good call. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Intense rainbands spread across the state's eastern coastline" wikilink to rainband
- fixed that myself
"Two of them - a woman in West Hollywood and a man in Hallendale - were killed when their houses collapsed from the strong winds." remove redlink please
- Why? What's wrong with redlinks? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Throughout the United States, Hurricane King caused 11 deaths and $30 million in damage (1950 USD). The hurricane also caused 199 injuries, of which 16 were severe." Should go elsewhere IMO as the damage is for all of the US, right.
- Yea, the section is "Elsewhere in the United States", so a country summary is appropriate there. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since you gave you fixed all of these or providing a reason why the sentence should not be changed, I am going to pass this article. Y E ^Tropical ^Cyclone 07:12, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Hurricane King

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Hurricane King's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "hurdat":

From Tropical cyclone: NHC Hurricane Research Division (2006-02-17). "Atlantic hurricane best track ("HURDAT")". NOAA. Retrieved 2007-02-22.
From Hurricane Dog (1950): NHC Hurricane Research Division (2006-02-17). "Atlantic hurricane best track". NOAA. Retrieved 2007-04-01.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 12:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hurricane King/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Downgraded to C because of unreferenced Misc. section, which is discouraged. Also because of improperly formatted refs. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 23:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 18:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane King. 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:

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) 23:39, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]