Talk:Hurricane Dora (1999)

Latest comment: 5 years ago by 12george1 in topic GA Review

Todo edit

More storm history, particularly from discussions, would be nice. Hurricanehink (talk) 13:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane Dora (1999). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:27, 6 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Dora (1999)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contribs) 19:42, 9 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • "Thereafter, Dora began heading in a steadily westward" - Missing a word and we can axe the comma after.
  • "Under warm sea surface temperatures and low wind shear," - Not to get technical, but the physical manifestation of a cyclone is above the water, not under it. :) Let's just go with "amid" or something similar.
  • "Thereafter, Dora fluctuated significantly in intensity due to shifts in the variability of atmospheric conditions" - What variability of atmospheric conditions? Some combo of shear or dry air or cooler waters? Just state that instead.
  • "with the storm ranging from peak intensity as a Category 4 hurricane to a low-end Category 1 hurricane." - Over what timeframe?
  • I'm going to say about four days. Dora was a Category 4 on August 12, was a Category 1 by August 14, and briefly became a major hurricane again on August 16--12george1 (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • "By August 4, the system entered the Pacific Ocean, accompanied by disorganized convection." - Link or describe convection.
  • "Three hours later, the National Hurricane Center (NHC) began issuing advisories on the depression and forecasted significant intensification." - Technically, the NHC initiated advisories when TD Seven-E formed. The difference in times is just the difference between operational and post season documenting. I'd axe this sentence.
  • "Upon becoming a tropical storm, the NHC noted "there would seem to be no reason why Dora should not strengthen", citing decent outflow on the western side of the storm and ocean temperatures of nearly 84 °F (29 °C)" - I don't think forecasting strengthening is particularly noteworthy. Axe this.
  • "Although the center began difficult to locate on satellite imagery on August 7, Dvorak T-numbers did not indicate a decrease in intensity." - This too, and re-link Dvorak in the next sentence.
  • "Thus, it was predicted that Dora would soon reach Category 3 intensity." - Axe this too.
  • "In a forecast discussion by the NHC nine hours later, it was noted that a mid-troposhperic ridge would track eastward, thus causing Dora to move in a west-northwestward motion.[9] However, the hurricane instead continued westward or slightly north of due west" - West-northwest versus just north of west is not really a big distinction. I'd axe the first sentence (and reword the next accordingly).
  • "Late on August 10, deep convection significantly expanded and became more symmetric, while Dvorak intensity estimates indicated that Dora reached Category 4 intensity." - But Dvorak estimates aren't official. Did NHC upgrade it?
  • "A predicted weakening trend led the NHC to note that Dora was probably near peak intensity.[10] However, early on August 11, the NHC noted that the hurricane might weaken slow than forecast, as it was expected to remain in an environment of warm sea surface temperatures and light wind shear for the next three days.[11]" - Axe. Slice and dice. Chop.
  • "Later on August 11, the NHC predicted somewhat slow weakening beginning in about 24 hours" - Can we reword this? Somewhat slow weakening sounds quirky.
  • "Early on August 14, the duty of hurricane advisories was transferred from the NHC to the Central Pacific Hurricane Center (CPHC),[15] as the storm had crossed 180°N" - 180N is not a thing.
  • "By then, the system was weakening significantly and fall to Category 2 intensity around 06:00 UTC." - Fall to fell.
  • "The cyclone had maintained major hurricane status from 00:00 UTC on October 10 to 06:00 UTC on October 14 – more than 96 hours." - Not particularly important.
  • "During a reconnaissance aircraft flight into the hurricane on August 16, a dropsonde recorded maximum sustained winds of 138 mph (222 km/h) at the 982 mbar (29.0 inHg) level." - But I'm not sure exactly what this means in terms of the storm's strength. The reference specifically notes satellite imagery as strong evidence for Cat 3. Maybe reword to something like "The combination of reconnaissance data and satellite imagery supported an upgrade of the storm back to Category 3 intensity..." or something like that.
  • "At 06:00 UTC, the storm intensified into a Category 3 hurricane with winds of 115 mph (185 km/h), while passing about 200 mi (320 km) south of the island of Hawaii – Dora's closest approach to the state of Hawaii." - Axe the comma after the winds and axe the "of Hawaii" at the end of the sentence since you mentioned Hawaii once already.
  • "The secondary peak intensity was brief, as weakening occurred after the forward speed increased." - This sentence implies the storm weakened because it sped up. Is that backed up by anything? If not, reword.
  • "Dora passed 65 mi (105 km) south of Johnston Island on August 18, before turning west-northwestward." - No comma. Also, that's very exact. Let's throw an "about" or "roughly" or some other quantifier in there.
  • "Around 00:00 UTC on the following day, Dora weakened to a tropical storm as it crossed the International Date Line as a 70 mph (115 km/h)." - A 70 mph what?! Don't leave me in suspense.
  • It would probably be better if I just axe the winds.--12george1 (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • "As the result, the storm became the first tropical cyclone since John in 1994 to have existed in all three north Pacific basins." - As the result --> As a result.
  • "Hurricane Dora also produced rough surf on Johnston Atoll, with one forecaster remarking the surf was the most severe aspect of the storm." - Not important.
  • "The automatic station at Johnston Atoll reported wind gusts between 40—45 mph (65–75 km/h) for two hours. " - Wew lad that's a huge dash, what's going on there?
  • "With a total track of 6,500 mi (10,500 km), Hurricane Dora had the second longest track of a Pacific hurricane, behind only Hurricane John of 1994" - This is a rounded value, so let's throw "about" or "roughly" etc here too.

A long list but not particularly hard to correct. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 19:42, 9 May 2019 (UTC)Reply