Talk:Hurricane Juliette (2001)
Latest comment: 1 day ago by Fritzmann2002 in topic GA Review
 | Hurricane Juliette (2001) 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. Review: July 12, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Todo
editNeeds more on impact, and slightly longer intro. Jdorje 20:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Impact pictures, inline sources. Jdorje 19:45, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- I found an AMS paper talking about Juliette. It turns out that it was one of the wettest tropical cyclones in point storm total rainfall in Baja California for the past quarter century. I'll add the reference/text in the next couple days. Thegreatdr 19:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Good find. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I found an AMS paper talking about Juliette. It turns out that it was one of the wettest tropical cyclones in point storm total rainfall in Baja California for the past quarter century. I'll add the reference/text in the next couple days. Thegreatdr 19:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Damages
editIf anyone is curious on how I found the damages, I found that Juliette caused $175 million dollars in damage in 2001, per this site. Though it says dollars, it means pesos, I asked my spanish friend (luckily enough I have one). After that, I converted $175 million pesos to USD using this monetary converter site. I wasn't sure of the date, so I chose late December. Then I inflated it to 2005 USD. If this is disallowed, I can remove it, but feel free to comment if necessary. Hurricanehink 19:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- That is okay for now, but ultimately we should use GDP deflation for the inflation calculation. — jdorje (talk) 20:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Did we agree on that (I forget)? The whole money thing is a little confusing, so until we change all of them, we should keep it as it is. Hurricanehink 20:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- We haven't really agreed yet. But that's how it was done in the Cuba document. I agree, until we start changing all of them, we should keep it as it is. — jdorje (talk) 21:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Lead section too short
editI believe that the lead section for this article is too short compared the the rest of the article. Gummycow moomilk 16:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
GA Review
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Juliette (2001)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 01:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Fritzmann2002 (talk · contribs) 01:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello Hurricanehink, I'll be taking this review. It's a bit out of my wheelhouse but I'll do my best, so bear with me. Fritzmann (message me) 01:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Fritzmann (talk · contribs), whatcha think? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- My apologies for the delay, holiday travel set me back more than I thought it would. 02:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- No worries at all, hope you had safe travels! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- My apologies for the delay, holiday travel set me back more than I thought it would. 02:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Prose
- In the lead and body, should damages be adjusted for inflation in a parenthetical? I am assuming they were $188 million in 2001, which is >$333 million today.
- As a general policy, hurricane articles don't generally include inflated damage totals. I clarified that by adding that in a note. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- "...Eastern Pacific Ocean, which quickly reorganized" I am not familiar with meteorological terminology; is this inferring the ocean is doing the reorganizing, or the storm?
- More the storm. I split the "quickly reorganized" part and placed it with the subsequent sentence. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does "the Hurricane Hunters" refer to anyone specifically or just weather hunters in general? If the latter, the linked article does not use capitals to describe them; if the former, is there a more accurate link or title to use for them?
- No need for the H to be capitalized, my mistake. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Even as someone who is not familiar with this science, the Meteorological History section was straightforward and I was able to follow it without much issue.
- WHOO! Sorry I just gotta thank you for pointing that out. I try and strike the balance between scientific terms but not getting too jargony. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- The 6,000 people in 45 shelters could be clarified as just in Baja
- I clarified it by tweaking the wording of the previous sentence, then saying "Throughout the state". ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps a statement at the start of the Impact section that is like "But Nicaragua did not sustain any major damage" would make that intro a little bit more comprehensive and fluid
- That's a tricky thing to prove. We don't usually include when storms don't do something, like if storms fail to cause much damage. So I moved that to the met history. It felt out of place before. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Earlier while Juliette was near its peak intensity..." earlier as in comparison to what?
- I changed it to more of a space reference, when it was offshore southern Mexico. The wind measurement was a little bit notable since it was gale force, which warranted some tropical storm warnings. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- "one related to an American surfer" was the person who died related to an American surfer? If so, I don't think that is particularly relevant to include
- Changed to "one of whom was an American surfer". I felt the nationality was a bit relevant since the death was in Mexico. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Businesses closed for over a week" businesses where?
- The general Los Cabos region. I specified that with "there". ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've done some minor ce and wikilinking throughout the article; as always, feel free to revert anything you take umbrage with and we can discuss further
References
- Are The Frederick News Post and Fairbanks Daily News Miner reliable sources for Pacific hurricanes? My inclination is yes but I would like to check because I can't find very much on them. All other sources look to be generally reliable.
- I think the fact that newspapers covered the storm is more of reflection of its notability, showing up in farflung places. I might be able to replace some of those references with URLs, but that was from the early internet. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Earwig is currently down for me, I will include checks for close paraphrasing in my spot checks but don't anticipate any issues.
- I swear on my years of editing that I didn't copy anything ;) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Spot-checks (10% of refs) for source integrity and plagiarism on refs 4, 29, 31 (this seems to state a US surfer was killed, not someone related to them), and 49 are all good. Ref 39, "Latitude 38" seems to be a local blog. The knocking down of some ships also seems more inconsequential than a lot of the other impact. Is there a strong need for this sentence and reference?
- Regarding Latitude 38, I felt it was useful to include it to have some form of impact outside of Los Cabos. By the nature of reporting, the tourist and popular areas tend to get the most coverage. If that still seems too minor, I can remove it, but I liked having an additional example of impacts. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Other
- The infobox is concise and informative
- All images are public domain and properly licensed, and have good captions
- The article is stable, with no recent edit warring or major vandalism
Summary The article is well written with only a few very minor points of correction. If you wouldn't mind pinging me once you've responded to my nitpicks, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you for a very thorough and informative article! Fritzmann (message me) 02:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review Fritzmann! Please let me know what you think. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the replies Hurricanehink, I am more than satisfied with your rationales for everything. Promoting the GA now, congrats and thanks for another excellent article! Fritzmann (message me) 14:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review Fritzmann! Please let me know what you think. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.