Talk:Hurricane Daisy (1962)

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.

[edit] Merge

Non-notable storm, minimal info. This is getting irritating. Merge -- §Hurricane ERIC§ archive -- my dropsonde 04:27, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Merging sounds good. Hurricanehink 01:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Against Merge added more infomation. Storm05 16:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You added very little. The death toll was 5, not 24. The damage total, when inflated, is $62 million, nowhere near the total you gave. The storm is still not notable enough for its own article. Why not add the impact section to the season summary??? Hurricanehink 16:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Did you read the link, it says the hurricane killed 24 people Storm05 17:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

That is not an official source. You need to go to NOAA for official sources. NOAA's list of deadliest cyclones is an excellent source, but it only lists cyclones that had or may have had at least 25 deaths. Daisy is not in there. — jdorje (talk) 18:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Also if you add information, you need to add the reference inline to the article. Otherwise how are people supposed to know where the info came from? You can't expect someone to read through all of the external links to find the one place that says the storm caused 24 rather than 5 deaths. — jdorje (talk) 18:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Todo

There is minimal notable information. More impact is needed. Jdorje 23:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, now that the article is new and rewriten, what more is needed for B? Juliancolton (talk) 00:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to see some more sources, as its coverage on Canada is lacking. "Although total damage estimates are univaliable, it is estimated that damages could surpass $10 million (1962 USD) dollars" - That makes no sense. Although I know it's from the preliminary report, damage reports likely have been released in the 45 years since then. This is why some more research is needed. Typos need to be fixed, and the overall writing is mediocre. It's a decent start, however. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, typos are fixed, I improved the writing somewhat, and I added a little more impact. Juliancolton (talk) 15:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Alright, my other comments still need to be addressed. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I am still looking for canada info. Juliancolton (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I can't find any info other than the preliminary report. Also, I believe it is up to B class standards. Juliancolton (talk) 18:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

There is plenty more information in the sources you have used. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Rainfall image added. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks you, it really helps the article. Juliancolton (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)