Talk:Hurricane Esther (1961)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hurricane Esther (1961) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
	This article has been assessed by editors of the WikiProject.
	The possible merging of this article has been discussed by editors of the WikiProject.
The following comments have been left for this page: See assessment page

Hurricane Esther (1961) has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

1 Merge?
2 Todo
3 GA promoted
4 Link to discussion of article at Wikipedia talk:Lead section

[edit] Merge?

This storm wasn't terribly notable. The info in the Project Stormfury section could be easily moved into the Project Stormfury article. The storm history isn't that extensive and there's not that much info on it. The track is unusual but that's not enough to justify an article. I vote merge. -- Hurricane Eric archive -- my dropsonde 03:14, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Support. The unusual track is specified in the storm history, and the stormfury section can go elsewhere. I'd wait for one or two more people's responses. Hurricanehink 04:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Against Merge. More info about Esther can be found in the Montly Weather Review and some internet sites. Storm05 15:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

But much of that info is already here. It caused little damage, its storm history (with the loop) can condensed a bit and put into the seasonal article, and, like Eric said, the Project Stormfury should be in that article. Still for merge. Hurricanehink 16:08, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Added more infomation Storm05 15:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I changed my mind. This has a chance to stay, but needs some more work. Hurricanehink 03:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Todo

Very low quality writing; lots to improve. Jdorje 07:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

No section should ever be called "Close call" or "Close calls". This is basically trivia. Merge it into an important section or remove it. — jdorje (talk) 03:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Since this article is obviously not going anywhere any time soon, I've corrected a lot of spelling and grammar errors, and reorganized the article a bit to look like other TC articles. --Coredesat 21:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Good work. I upped it to B class. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

The primary source for this article should be the NHC archive on the storm here. The "prenhc" subdirectory contains the TCR (page 1) and the advisories (the rest of it); should be the primary source for most things. Other things to do, metrication and the like.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm going through it now to see what references I can change. --Coredesat 00:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Expanded impact, changed most of the references to official NHC/NWS reports, and removed a few redundant links from the External Links section. --Coredesat 01:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Expanded the intro, added some missing areas to the "areas affected" section (Long Island was left out for some reason), and did some minor cleanup. I'll split off a preparations section and change all the references to cite web format later. I might send this off to PR when I'm done. I've got a lot more enthusiasm since this is the first article I've helped reach GA status. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 08:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA promoted

Hope you guys could bring other categories to GA status rather than sticking to hurricane. With your talent for the hurricane articles the other wikiprojects would benefit.

I don't really have advices into what to work on next, I'd consider a PR. Lincher 03:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Cordesat, you should put it up for FAC. It looks ready. --Hurricanehink (talk) 18:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Now an FA. Great job, Cordesat. —Cuivi é nen 04:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully any future ones will be easier to find sources for. Oh, and there's an extra "e" in my username. :P --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 05:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)