Template:Did you know nominations/1901 Louisiana hurricane
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:26, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
1901 Louisiana hurricane
[edit]... that a hurricane in Louisiana in 1901 destroyed everything in Port Eads, except the lighthouse?
- ALT1:... that the 1901 Louisiana hurricane was the first hurricane to strike the state in the month of August or earlier since 1888?
- Reviewed: Vika Lusibaea
Created by 12george1 (talk). Self nominated at 15:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC).
I don't see that the hook fact is confirmed. The article and the source both say that the office building/small cabin used by the weather service "weathered the storm", so it survived as well. Indeed, I don't see anything in Alciatore's report in the source that indicates that sort of widespread destruction in Port Eads, and I can't find mention of the Port Eads lighthouse there. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:30, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- I had it sourced by the wrong reference. Should be good now.--12george1 (talk) 16:10, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: My bad, thanks for pointing out. I had to assume good faith based on the verification of the same fact mentioned here. @12george1: It would be nice if you add page numbers for large PDF files. —Vensatry (ping) 16:53, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- 12george1, you have sources that disagree with each other, and those same disagreements are in the article text: the contemporaneous report (FN2) states clearly that a particular building survived (which wasn't a lighthouse), and the source you've just pointed to (FN5) says nothing survived except the lighthouse. FN5 also says ten people died from the storm, while FN3 mentions the 15 people from a single family who died, and also later cites Dunn and Miller 1960 for a "considerable loss of life" statement. Not only do you have to reconcile these discrepancies in the article, but I frankly think the FN2 contemporaneous source is more trustworthy, as it's far more detailed, and renders the current hook untenable. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:17, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset:, should I add an alternate hook stating that the lighthouse and an office building remained standing?--12george1 (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
- 12george1, no. It is not a valid statement any more than the original hook was: one of the sources says that only the lighthouse remained, and another clearly states that the office building remained. When they disagree like this, one of them must be wrong, and to do WP:SYNTHESIS by combining two contradictory statements, as you did both here and in the article, just doesn't work. My suggestion is that you come up with a different hook that doesn't involve Port Eads, and that you carefully word the article so it points out that there is disagreement on the facts. You should also do the same with the 15 from one family vs. 10 total for the storm, because these also are irreconcilable, and simply using the larger number for the total deaths does not accurately reflect either source. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:20, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
- Changed the hook completely. Probably more interesting than the Port Eads hook, too. Since the 1980s, it seems that only up to 8 years go by without a hurricane landfall in Louisiana before September. Here's some examples: Hurricane Danny (1985), Hurricane Andrew, Hurricane Danny (1997), Hurricane Katrina, and Hurricane Isaac (2012)--12george1 (talk) 03:39, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
Hook checks out, but it seems arbitrary to me. —Vensatry (ping) 17:12, 8 May 2014 (UTC)