Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Hernan (2002)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 20:30, 4 January 2009 [1].

Hurricane Hernan (2002)

Nominator(s): –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone

This is one of my older GAs, one which passed early last year. As with many of my nominations, it is a fairly short article, but as the storm remained at sea, there is little information that can be added. A couple of users have helped with the article, and I feel it meets the criteria. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I withdraw so I can work on other stuff. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 02:25, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose.
- Unit consistency is needed (fix rounding, make sure every unit in the article has a metric unit).
- Add (inHg) conversions.
- I think the origins are lacking in detail. There is plenty of more information in the form of tropical weather outlooks and tropical weather discussions.
- I also think the development section (TD to Cat 5) is rushed, without sufficient detail. You don't go into *how* the hurricane intensified, what structural changes occurred, etc. The prose from when it reached hurricane status to Cat. 5 status only mentions the development of an eye, in terms of actual meteorological information.
- Most of the advisories are named wrong in the references. You call them "public advisory", but I checked and they're discussions.
- You never say why the hurricane weakened, except for these statements - as it began to lose tropical characteristics. Strong wind shear developed, further dissipating the depression. The first part isn't true, as the TCR says nothing about Hernan becoming extratropical (just becoming a remnant low, which has plenty of tropical characteristics). The second part is the only meteorological reason I can find which would cause weakening, but that's only mentioned when it was on the verge of dissipating (which I believe is the wrong term here - dissipation means the circulation is about to break apart).
- Something is missing or wrong in the meteorological history. You say it meandred (typo, should be meandered) off the coast of California, but the TCR says the remnant low tracked southwestward until dissipating. The article should mention and focus on what the TCR says, and ideally you should find more on what the remnant low did (did it reform? why did it track southwestward?)
- Some of the prose feels clumsy. Meteorological terms aren't explained that well. For example:
  - where it merged with a pre-existing intertropical convergence zone disturbance - this isn't what the TCR says, and it's confusing
  - The system gradually developed moderate convection, and on August 30 it had developed sufficient convection to be designated Tropical Depression 10-E. - as I said above, you don't go much into the origins; the current prose has a redundancy with the word convection, but hopefully that will be changed
  - The depression produced persistent strong thunderstorms, primarily in two areas of deep convection located to the northeast and west of the center of circulation - first, that is not supported by the ref, and second you don't explain why the convection was like that
  - outflow was good - non-meteorological people won't know what that means.
This is just a look at the met. history, but I feel the article needs too much work. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator: [2] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.