Talk:Hurricane Olivia (2018)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 20:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The fifteenth named storm, ninth hurricane, and sixth major hurricane of the 2018 Pacific hurricane season, Olivia originated from a disturbance that formed over the southwest Caribbean Sea on August 26. It tracked westward over the next couple of days before crossing over Central America and entering the northeastern Pacific Ocean. On August 30, broad area of low pressure that formed several hundred miles southwest of Mexico. The disturbance moved west-northwest before developing into a tropical depression on September 1. - consider the first sentence, and what you're saying. You're starting by putting Olivia into context of the season, which is good, most storm articles have that. Then you go to a confusing part about the Caribbean Sea, because I thought this was about a Pacific storm. You take a lot of time talking about the origins, but the article isn't about the origins. It's about Olivia, which formed on September 1. I'd Rewrite this section, keeping the first part and keeping it short and sweet by focusing on when Olivia formed, not its origin story.

I trimmed a bit more, but that's better now. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Due to adverse weather conditions,~~ the depression slowly organized and strengthened into Tropical Storm Olivia on the next day." - the first part is unneeded for the lead of the article. You want to draw in your audience, not be excessively verbose.
Olivia then began a period of rapid intensification on September 3, which resulted in Olivia initially peaking as a high-end Category 3 hurricane on September 5. Olivia then began a weakening trend that left it as a low-end Category 2 hurricane. Olivia then began to re-intensify on September 6. On the next day, Olivia peaked as a Category 4 hurricane, with winds of 130 mph (215 km/h) and a minimum central pressure of 951 mbar (28.08 inHg). - this lacks context to someone who happened to stumble on this article through random article clicks, when you mention the categories without mentioning the scale. You could remove all of the categories except for C4, and when you do, link it as Category 4, which will link it to other C4 Pacific hurricanes. Also "which resulted in Olivia initially peaking " - this is wonky. Try being simpler writing this part of the article, save the details for the body of the article.
Make sure you give some mention of the storm effects in the lead. Otherwise, why am I reading the article?
A broad area of low pressure ~~that~~ formed several hundred miles southwest of Mexico on August 30.[
Operationally, the NHC reported that the depression became Olivia at 09:00 UTC on September 2,[4] but was later revised 00:00 UTC on the same day in the Tropical Cyclone Report. - this is a very technical explanation for what happened. The NHC routinely makes adjustments in their final report. The key moment that happened was that "The depression intensified into Tropical Storm Olivia on September 2 when it attained gale-force sustained winds." This is a much shorter.
I'd merge the second and third paragraphs of the met history. It's well-written, but the third paragraph is odd starting as "Shortly after, however, Olivia began a weakening trend, falling below Category 3 status at 12:00 UTC on September 5." That feels like a continuation of the previous storm narrative. Also, most articles usually don't mention the minimum storm pressure multiple times unless it's a record or something significant. I don't think it's needed to include the 954 mbar when you mention the initial peak intensity.
Soon after, Olivia quickly lost all of its convection and dissipated, due to wind shear. However, Olivia's remnant energy contributed to the formation of a weak tropical depression, which became Tropical Depression 29W. - reference?

I hate to be picky, but the JMA reference doesn't say anything about Olivia. The JTWC reference is good, because it says "remnants of 17E". If you can get a JTWC source definitively saying Olivia became 29W, then you're in good shape. Also, ref 18 (which you added) is in all caps, could you rewrite it to it's normally written? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Olivia was the first tropical cyclone to make landfall on the islands of Maui and Lanai in recorded history." -you mention this in the impact, but I think it should go in the MH when you mention said landfalls.
The second preps paragraph could be merged with the first one. They're both about preparations, and it wouldn't be too long for one paragraph.
I feel like you should mention that Olivia wasn't the first storm to affect Hawaii in the season. Perhaps you could mention Lane here instead of "see also"?

Make sure you add a ref for Lane. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"A peak winds of 55 mph (89 km/h) was observed in Lanai Airport, and a peak winds of 46 mph (74 km/h) was observed in Kuaokala." - "A peak wind of... was observed" not "A peak winds"
Were there any landslides? Power outages? Business closures? Canceled sports matches? 10-12 inches of rain is significant, so check for more sourcing.

All in all the article is in pretty good shape. I'd appreciate more attention to the flow of prose, and a bit more researching for effects. The article is on hold for now. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: Is that better? I found some more information, but there isn't a lot out there due to sources reporting on Florence. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 22:20, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Simple - if you want to do a search for Olivia without Florence, type into Google [Olivia Hawaii -Florence]. However, with the recent addition of sources, I don't think you'll be able to add much else. Make sure you check the "Storm Events" database in another month once September reports come out. You might be able to add a bit more. But I'm not gonna hold up the GAN over that. I just have two more issues (see above), and then I'll be happy to pass. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: I have fixed those issues. I added a ref for lane's rainfall and simply removed the other thing as there weren't any official sources. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 18:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The end of the MH is still unsourced. Also, ref 18 is still in all upper case. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:18, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: Okay... should be all fixed now. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 18:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your edits. I'm passing the article for GA status! Good work. In the future, look for confirmation of the connection between Olivia and 29W, which we know probably to be true, but we might not have the best sourcing for that yet. We might get that when CPHC/JTWC finishes their review of the storm, or in Gary Padgett's September tropical cyclone summary (currently he is at July 2018). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:41, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't the one who added the 29W connection. It was a regular editor of the Pacific Typhoon articles. I didn't realize at the time that the JMA source didn't have the connection. Anyways, thanks for the review. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 22:11, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]