Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/1975 Pacific hurricane season/archive1

1975 Pacific hurricane season

3 articles

Pacific Northwest hurricane

Hurricane Olivia

Contributor(s): YE, Hurricanehink

Well, here it is. The 1975 season is not a well-remember hurricane season. However, two very notable storms occurred. The 1975 Pacific Northwest hurricane formed and dissipated near Alaska. Hurricane Olivia left 30,000 homeless in Mexico, and 30 million in damage. Sadly, several people died.

Both of these storms have article. Before something asks, all of the article storms (save Agatha) can't get articles. In the case of Agatha, it could get one, but is not an obvious gap due to lack of info.

I hope you like it.

Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 23:08, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the reviewer for the 1975 PHS article, I'm not voting, but commenting. The main article is a bit weak on prose, I'd like to see someone copyedit the article first, as the writing is just passable. HurricaneFan 25 14:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Some articles have dead links in them. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 06:44, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All should be fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane

Comment The lede is a bit on the flimsy side..May I suggest expanding it to two paragraphs or so? Additionally, there are some deadlinks in the article, and in the "Storms" section, the storms' summaries are weak. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 16:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is two paragraphs, good enough for an uneventful EPAC season, though I did add a tad more of content to the lead. The storm's summaries are similar in length to the 1973 Pacific hurricane season. Remember, this is EPHC era, so they are no discussions or TWO's. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 16:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't the number of paragraph, it's the number of sentences (which is pretty scant). --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:47, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added a couple more sentences. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 17:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More comments are needed here. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 22:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment From the position of an informed layperson (one who has lived through hurricanes but neither studies them nor writes about them on Wikipedia), the articles look fine. I'm reluctant to support however, because the fact that none of the regular Hurricane writers are expressing confidence in this. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I suppose I'll bring up the reason I haven't committed. Eventually, can there be a good topic on every season? Should the fact that the topic meets the bare minimum mean it be promoted? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- I agree, more articles are needed for the topic before I would support. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 12:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - TA, no more articles can be made, so that's not actionable, and Hink, I don't see why not? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 15:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - That was more of an open question. But, seeing as it meets the criteria, I'll support this becoming a good topic. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support While I would like to see more topics, it is not a requirement, so... I support this topic. – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support The articles that are there are good, and some seasons (thankfully for everyone but our excellent Hurricane writers team) just don't produce many storms worth mentioning. BTW, if you're looking for a larger topic, why not shoot for a "Pacific Hurricanes of the 1970s" topic? Sven Manguard Wha? 05:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- A larger topic would be List of Pacific hurricane seasons which would include articles from 1949-2011. But yea, do to high notability requirements, many storms during this time period can't get articles. My next two topic I will be releasing will have more articles, however. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 15:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, would that work for topic rules? The main article would be List of Pacific hurricane seasons, but if that were hypothetically featured, would such a list be acceptable? You know, some seasons with one or no sub-articles would not be part of a topic until the entire "Lit of Pacific hurricane seasons" was done. It'd be great to be able to do "List of Pacific hurricane seasons (1970-1979)", and then add to the topic as the 60s or 80s was done. Imagine the same for the World Series, if it was "1980-1989 World Series" (since I doubt anyone would get all 100+ world series articles done anytime soon). --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Heh. I was going to say that but I forgot. ;) HurricaneFan 25 — 17:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well, one article can not be a part of more than four topics, so I am afraid it would not meet the rules. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 19:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't understand your argument. First, I don't think there is a rule that an article can't be part of four topics (I see nothing on WP:WIAFT), and second, no article would be part of more than four topics (AFIAK), sans "List of Pacific hurricane seasons". I think this is a discussion better for FT questions, so I'll ask there. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        Hmm, I remember reading somewhere that an article can not be part of more than four topics. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 19:40, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Closed with consensus to promote. - GamerPro64 18:20, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]