Talk:Hurricane Dean/GA1
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Mattisse in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
Hi Plasticup. I will be reviewing your article. It is the first GA review I have ever done so I hope I can help you out. Do you mind if I just fix little errors myself, or do you want everything listed here? —Mattisse (Talk) 19:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Feel free to fix anything you see. In an article this size that is the only way to accomplish anything. Plasticup T/C 13:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- This sentence in the lead needs some fixing: "Remarkably, none of the deaths were the result of Hurricane Dean's exceptionally unusually Category 5-strength landfall."
- Maybe you could leave out the "exceptionally" as "unusual Category 5-strength" might cover it, along with "remarkably".
- How about ""Remarkably, none of the deaths were the result of Hurricane Dean's unusual and exceptionally intense Category 5 landfall."" Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- Also, I have a question about a related sentence: "The hurricane's intense winds, waves, rains and storm surge were directly responsible for at least 37 deaths...". Are not these events part of the landfall? Is it "landfall" that usually causes deaths? (Living in a hurricane zone—in fact facing a hurricane at this moment—we are always being told otherwise.)
- This sentence needs some clarification, perhaps with punctuation and/or rephrasing: "Although Mexico bore the brunt of Hurricane Dean's strength, the landfall missed major population centers and caused little more damage there than early in its formation when it passed the French overseas department of Martinique."
- How about ""Although Mexico bore the brunt of Hurricane Dean's strength, the landfall missed major population centers and caused $800 million (2007 USD) of property damage in the country. This amount was slightly more than the damage Dean caused when it passed the French overseas department of Martinique early in the storm's formation."" Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- I don't want to get into country-specific damage totals in the lead, but I agree that the original sentence was confusing. This is what I have replaced it with: Although Mexico bore the brunt of Hurricane Dean's strength, the landfall missed major population centers. As a result, it caused little more damage there than early in its formation when it passed the French overseas department of Martinique as a Category 2 hurricane. Plasticup T/C 13:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- This sentence is not entirely clear: "On August 18, 2007, 10,300 barrels (1,210 m³) of oil and 11 million cubic feet (310,000 m³) of natural gas were shut in per day,"
- Not really sure what's wrong with it. "Shut in" is a term in the oil exploration industry for when wells are shut down and the oil/gas remains below the oceanic or continental surface. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- I made a page, Shut-in (oil drilling), and wikilinked to it. Plasticup T/C 13:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- "Fifteen countries felt the effects of Hurricane Dean as its path through the Caribbean Sea claimed 42 lives." Is this different from the 37 lives in the lead?
- Yeah, that's wrong. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- "encountering favorable conditions": I know your source does not explain what "favorable conditions" are, could you possibly explain (or wikilink) for those of us trying to understand hurricanes?
- Tropical cyclogenesis#Requirements for formation Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- "The Cayman Islands were expected to suffer brutally...". Perhaps another word is better suited, as brutality seems like something dictators do.
- That's Plasticup's style... he can defend it himself. :P Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- I believe Tony says that when a "to" is implied in a range ("Rainfall amounts of 4–8 in (100–200 mm) fell across the states") you should use the word "to" and not a hyphen or ndash.
- I'm curious why in your Aftermath section, you have not kept to the same heading format as the other sections.
- Some of your wording is idiosyncratic, but that can be personal preference. The article is excellent, well-referenced and well-organized. The grammar and wikilinking are good. Ready for FAC I'd say, after you fix a few things mentioned above. —Mattisse (Talk) 22:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - You know that "exceptionally unusual" will never pass FAC, but, of course, will not hold up things here. Could you not say "Hurricane Dean's exceptional Category 5 landfall strength" or something similar. "Hurricane Dean's exceptional landfall strength, even for a Category 5"? Exceptional and unusual have, more or less, the same meaning. —Mattisse (Talk) 15:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)