Talk:Meteorological history of Hurricane Katrina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Meteorological history of Hurricane Katrina 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 article was nominated for deletion on 17/3/2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	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.

Contents 1 Todo 2 Delete? 3 Revert note 4 GA comments

[edit] Todo

This was a copy-and-paste of a section in the main Katrina article, so it needs an intro (and the main article may still need to be pruned). --AySz88^-^ 04:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I added and intro and cleaned the article up some. I'll check the main article now and prune. --AySz88^-^ 00:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Done, but wasn't able to do much in the main article :/. --AySz88^-^ 00:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delete?

Most of the information is already included in the Hurricane Katrina article, and the only thing that would really need merging is the final paragraph of this article, as everything else is either unnecessary detail or worded more concisely in the main article. So, should it be merged or deleted? Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 23:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I have no particular objection. Originally I took the old storm history from the Katrina article and moved it here, then condensed it greatly in the main article. This version is still about twice as long, and could surely be made longer. The question is whether there's any reason to do such a thing. — jdorje (talk) 23:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

With the exception of the records part, I don't see why it should be expanded more than this. Any reader that requires the exact hour at which Katrina became a Category 2 hurricane would probably be looking at the TCR anyway. There's way too many subpages of Katrina, some of which have excessive information, so I'll send it to AFD. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 23:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I just simplified the text in the main Hurricane Katrina article regarding storm history, and moved a lot of content to this article (with a 'main' link in the original article). Dr. Cash 21:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Er, wasn't the content at the main Katrina article already in this article (I think)? I'm not sure exactly what you did, since the diff is marking basically everything as changed.... --AySz88^-^ 22:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revert note

I reverted this edit because I felt that it was redundant with both other sections on this page and with the Storm History at Hurricane Katrina, and because it had a lot of impact information which isn't really within the scope of this article. I advised Wikid77 on his user talk page to avoid impacts and if he still feels any things aren't redundant to add them to their respective articles/sections. —AySz88\^-^ 03:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA comments

I enjoy reading this article, as the story of meteorogical history of Hurricane Katrina flows smoothly from the formation to the demise with a clear well-written prose that a non-specialist reader, like me, can grab the whole article without any problem. This article is also supported by reliable sources and it can be verified easily with inline citations. The subject of this article is the meteorogical history of Katrina and it is indeed about it from the lead section till the end, making this article broad enough in terms of its topic without diverging into the Katrina disaster at all. The lead section is also very nice to summarize this meteorogical history. I see no NPOV problem, as it is only factual text, and thus this article does not suffer any edit wars (it is stable).

However, I see 2 problems in the images used, which can prevent me to grant GA status of this article:

1. Image Image:Katrina_2005_track.png has wrong license tag, as it comes from NASA, not own work. It can be easily changed its tag.
2. Image Image:Katrina_vs_sea_surface_height.JPG is copyrighted, thus it is not suitalble for Wikipedia.

I put this article as ON HOLD in the WP:GAC. Please leave me a message, as soon as the above problems are fixed. — Indon (reply) — 21:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The Katrina map is own work (mine). Its only the BG map that is NASA...--Nilfanion (talk) 22:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The first second image should be usable, as "The copyright holder allows anyone to use it for any purpose." I think it (and similar images) was released by Jim Scott at the University of Colorado, like Image:Wilma oct24 11am.jpg (which actually mentions the e-mail). —AySz88\^-^ 22:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The first image is solved, but I have to check whether copyrighted image tag for free use for the second one is really valid. I'll be right back for that. — Indon (reply) — 23:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Per WP:TAG, one of the guidelines says:

* When marking an image as one of the more vague categories (such as CopyrightedFreeUse), try to specify somewhere what the actual license or other permission states.

It is a vague category, but it is accepted as one official Wikipedia image tag. Thus I have to give GA status as images are properly tagged, per WP:WIAGA. — Indon (reply) — 23:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)