Talk:Tropical Storm Bonnie (2004)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tropical Storm Bonnie (2004) 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 following comments have been left for this page: Ready for WP:FAC. Titoxd(?!?) 03:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Carolina, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve North Carolina-related articles to a feature-quality standard.

Contents 1 Merge? 2 ...a chart of every individual cyclone-spawned tornado? 3 Restart/Todo 4 GA Promotion

[edit] Merge?

There is a lot of information here, but it is very detailed, in fact too much. 15 lines of an impact does not mean the storm was notable. In addition, it could be easily condensed, based on the repetitive reports on the information. What could be said is an overview of the tornadoes, rather than tediously reporting every tornado from the storm. The writing, as usual from this contributor, is sloppy in cases, with spelling errors across the page. I personally don't see why a storm that did this little should have an article. I'd like to propose a merge for this article. Hurricanehink 16:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Previously the level of detail in the seasonal article was too high, and bonnie had one of the longest sections. Either some info needs to be cut to shorten the season article entry, or a separate article is needed. That said, however, the writing here is terrible and almost every section needs heavy work if this article is to stay. Jdorje 17:08, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

What do you MEAN the writing is terrible, I checked and double checked for any errors and cant find any. You'll need to tell me what those errors are (because wikipedia does not have a spell check). Storm05 17:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The spelling isn't bad. The only errors there are "tor", "steadly", and "luckly". The main problem is the lack of organization. You say Bonnie spawned some tornadoes in the impact section. How many? Then, you describe every last one. The article isn't Tornadoes spawned by Tropical Storm Bonnie, it's just the storm. Rather than going one by one, you could say,

"Damage in Florida was minimal, due to its small size and quick passage. As a weakening tropical depression, Bonnie produced a tornado outbreak from South Carolina through Virginia. While most were weak and caused minimal damage, a tornado in Rocky Point, North Carolina killed three as it crossed through a trailor park. The effects from the tornadoes ranged from damaged houses to downed trees, with one such tornado in Jacksonville, North Carolina causing $284,000 in damage. The storm brought moderate rainfall along its path, bringing around 5 inches in the Carolinas and 3 inches in New England. The rainfall flooded roads, while its winds left 600 without electricity or natural gas."

Such an impact is short enough to put into the season article, yet omits little from the existing impact section. Face it, the storm simply wasn't notable, and there isn't enough to write about. It's good you are adding detail, but some storms don't have enough information or impact to write an article about it. I will ask one more time, why don't you add more information to the season articles? It is better to add more to existing articles than to write more low-quality stubs. Lastly, please take no offense from anything we do. We are merely trying to help unleash your potential. Your interest in hurricanes is great! That's why we're here. We just want to actually listen to our comments. I still think the article should be merged, but face it, there are few Atlantic storms left to write about. If you want a project, you should work on bringing low-quality articles to better standards. You seem to enjoy researching it, which is a great asset we need here. Hopefully you will listen to what we say, and we mean no offense. Hurricanehink 20:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I say merge this article and trim the main article section. This storm is just too non-notable for it to have an article. Damages were less than $5 million and the 3 deaths were from a tornado spawned by the dissipating depression. Merge it. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 22:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Added tornado table Storm05 18:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I honestly don't think that tornado table contributes that much. -- §HurricaneERIC§^Damagesarchive 14:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Completely agreed. It just clutters the impact section. The article as about the storm, not about the tornado outbreak that was caused by the storm. Given the lack of damage from most of the tornadoes, it is alright to write about them as a whole. Still say merge. Hurricanehink 16:08, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting an itchy axe hand... -- §HurricaneERIC§^Damagesarchive 02:36, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ...a chart of every individual cyclone-spawned tornado?

Whoever made that, why don't you do one for Frances too? --SomethingFunny 10:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

No, too many tornados. -- §HurricaneERIC§^Damagesarchive 14:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Restart/Todo

OK, I rewrote the article from scratch. Any ideas for improvements? Hurricanehink (talk) 21:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

This should be an A-class article, I think. íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 14:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Promotion

Congratulations to the editor of this article in achieving GA status Gnangarra 14:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)