Talk:Hurricane Helene (1958)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones. |
 |
The possible merging of this article has been discussed by editors of the WikiProject. |
[edit] Merge
There is currently little information associated with this article. As it is, I propose it be merged. However, this storm might be able to stay.
- Add much more information about the Reconaissance. If it was the first flight, how accurate was it
- "According to reports, the damage wrought by Helene was considered worse than the damage from Hurricane Hazel." Who reported it? What damage occurred? $11 million in damage is very little. Was the damage localized? Was it widespread yet minor? Was there significant flooding that caused the damage, or was it tornadoes?
- What makes the storm notable? The intro should always specify why it is notable and thus, why it should have its own page. "Hurricane Helene was of the most intense storms of the 1958 Atlantic hurricane season" According to the seasonal article, it was the most, so why not start with that?
I still think the storm should be merged, but out of this, Janice, and Ella for the season, this one is the most likely to stay in the long run, and even that is pretty low. Why do you continue making stub articles when there are too many low-quality articles as it is? Hurricanehink 15:21, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- When I first read about this storm a few months ago while doing the old articles, I was pretty intrigued. This storm followed the same path as Ophelia, but as a category 4! It came within 10 miles of being the most northerly landfalling cat4 storm (although it's not alone in this, as Hurricane Diana (1984) also did so). As for damage, I'm sure the damage *in some places* was worse than that of Hazel. Hazel hardly touched the outer banks for instance. In summary, although I like this storm, I basically agree that unless more info can be found it should be merged. — jdorje (talk) 19:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- As it is, it should be merged, badly. However, there could be enough information out there to justify an article, the reconaissance section in particular. There should be more on damage as well... it was practically a Category 4 landfall! I say we give it a week. Storm05, does that sound fair? Hurricanehink 21:51, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- A week is fine, i've already added a picture for the storm. Storm05 17:34, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- As it is, it should be merged, badly. However, there could be enough information out there to justify an article, the reconaissance section in particular. There should be more on damage as well... it was practically a Category 4 landfall! I say we give it a week. Storm05, does that sound fair? Hurricanehink 21:51, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
It's been a week and I see little improvement. I vote to axe it. I just don't think enough info is out there and I have yet to be proven wrong. -- §HurricaneERIC§Damagesarchive 23:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- He's right. Little was added, and little probably can be added. Agreed with merge. Hurricanehink 04:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Against Merge- added more info and picture. Storm05 15:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Good work. I'd say hold off on merge for now. This looks like it could possibly stay... Hurricanehink 16:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Winds?
Several sources claim 125 mph or 135 mph winds were felt on land from this storm. However, the source reports no hurricane-force winds on land. So what gives? — jdorje (talk) 23:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
