Talk:Hurricane Dean

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.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Please remember to sign your comments using "~~~~"! (This request includes anonymous users.) Discussion should be limited to this article and related articles. Please keep off-topic discussion to a minimum.

Archives: 1.

Please put all storm discussion on the Hurricane Wikia. Discussion here should only be about the article.

Contents 1 image replacment 2 Dean's path 3 Mexico is not in Central America 4 Table with countries: Martinique is not a country 5 Puerto Rico effects 6 Death toll as of 23 August 7 Missing citation 8 GA? 9 Cleaning up the page 10 Preparations section, Dominican Republic 11 Structure of multi-article storm article sets 12 Is this page size archive ready?? 13 So much for dodging the bullet 14 Effects on Jamaica? 15 First Sentence (grammar) 16 Better landfall picture 17 Semi-protection 18 Effects/persistence/impacts of remnant low? 19 What if... 20 This is a start? 21 Dean Retired?

[edit] image replacment

Should i replace the image in the hurricane infobox with the higher-res NOAA-18 image in the meteorological history article? IrfanFaiz 09:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Just wait for MODIS to get a good high-res image up. – Chacor 10:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Theres two new MODIS images, the first one is when Dean is over the Yucatan and the second one, during landfall over mainland Mexico. Should we use either of these? Or to wait for a one that the storm looks impressive in an image? IrfanFaiz 01:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dean's path

Why is it that the path of Dean remained almost perfectly straight? I know that things such as other disturbances in the area, incoming fronts, or the jet stream could cause storms to move, but with this storm being so perfect in its movement (something you don't see too often), was it just a coincidence that there happened to be absolutely no other activity in the area to disturb its path? Sure, the storm takes a few tiny bends during build up and break down, but it pretty much cruises straight, which I find peculiar. Jared (t)  13:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, category 5 Huricades are so powerful they tend to bulldoze the other disturbances out of their way. As to when Dean was merely a cat 3 & less, there was (and still is) a powerful High Pressure System that's been pretty much stationary over the Southern US resulting in the steering winds being "straight" Jon 16:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

There was a very very strong ridge of high pressure that stayed north of Dean, but moved along west with him. This caused a very fast westward motion. Also, please ask these types of questions not pertaining to the article on the Hurricane Wikia. Thanks. ---CWY2190^TC 08:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mexico is not in Central America

I think the author should change the reference about Mexico under the heading "Impact" to reflect that Mexico is in North America (along with Canada and the U.S.) rather than in Central America.

Pagosajoe 18:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Mexico is important enough to stand out on its own. CrazyC83 22:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Uh, that's not really the point, but right now Mexico's lumped in with Nicaragua and listed as a Central American country. Not the kind of accuracy that makes for a good article. Pagosajoe 00:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:BOLD. Plasticup ^T/C 19:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Table with countries: Martinique is not a country

It is a French department. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.100.203.184 (talk) 22:57, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, fixed. --Golbez 00:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Good catch! I wasn't sure how to treat it; semi-independent colonies and dependencies (i.e. Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Puerto Rico) should go in the country line, but you are right, Martinique is a full region of France. CrazyC83 04:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

how did it kill anyone from france —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.220.182.88 (talk) 00:38, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Martinique is a small island in the Caribbean that is also part of France. Just like Hawaii is part of the United States. --Golbez 01:28, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Puerto Rico effects

Here's the preliminary report on Dean from the San Juan, Puerto Rico NWS. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Death toll as of 23 August

The death toll is reported as "at least 37", but no source is given. Reuters report 23 as of 23 August, so I've changed it to this figure. If anyone has anything more up to date, please cite a good source and update the figure. Palefire 08:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

There are bound to be different numbers from different sources. The table of deaths is individually sourced for each country, that's where 37 is from. – Chacor 10:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct. There is no single source picking the number up, but different sources having different causes listed. There is a note at the bottom saying numbers may not match. CrazyC83 14:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missing citation

There's a missing citation for "Fox_2007-08-21_Mex01" (reference number 98). – Chacor 10:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

That's the format that I was using... let me check my page history. Plasticup ^T/C 19:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I don't think it was mine. My only FoxNews pages are from August 18th. I guess it was someone else. Plasticup ^T/C 19:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA?

Right, now that Dean has happened, I am planning to nominate Dean for GA status. If no one objects within five hours, I am nominating it. Davnel03 14:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Far from ready from GA. Still unstable while damage reports continue to flow in. It isn't ready. – Chacor 14:38, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Maybe in a month or so depending on how active September is. ---CWY2190^TC 18:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Way too soon. This article will look totally different in 6 weeks. Plasticup ^T/C 19:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleaning up the page

OK, now that we have a lot of information on this page, and the storm is pretty much done with, might I suggest for our first move that we merge the Preparations and Impact sections, because it's sort of obnoxious seeing each country/region's name listed twice, especially if that section is only a few sentences long. It would, IMO, make the page look neater. Jared (t)  14:02, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Preparations is distinctly different from impact. Merging them makes no sense. – Chacor 14:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

That makes no difference. If we want the page to look aesthetically pleasing, we would make amends to the section contents and names in order to do so. Frankly now, while well sourced and such, I would personally fail this in a GA because it's not neat at all. It's just a bunch of information strewn into sections. Jared (t)  16:11, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

So would I. Thats why it won't be nominated for a while. Look at every other hurricane article, preparations and impact are different sections. ---CWY2190^TC 18:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Individual countries can be combined into regional preparations/impacts, if they truly are small enough. However, the preparations and impact sections are pretty much immutable, as every single tropical cyclone article follows that format. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 23:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, so perhaps I went too far. If I were to take a step back, then, I would suggest that each individual section, seeing that they are distinctly different, be tidied up in and of itself. In other words, sections should probably not be broken off by country, but more integrated into one flowing section describing the impact or preparations for a specific region, because I'm sure, without having read the article, that each regional preparations and impacts were similar. Having seen an FA like Hurricane Katrina, I see the importance of the two sections, but on the same token, don't feel they should take over the whole article. Jared (t)  00:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that there are too many country subsections, and even sub-sub-sections, which is really not needed. — jdorje (talk) 05:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I suggested a few days ago that we should have several articles, like with Katrina maybe these:

• Timeline of Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Meteorological history of Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Preparations for Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Economic effects of Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Political effects of Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Criticism of government response to Hurricane Dean (2007) - this is obviously if there is any
• Social effects of Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Hurricane Dean (2007) effects by region
• Civil engineering and infrastructure repair after Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Hurricane Dean (2007) disaster relief
• International response to Hurricane Dean (2007)
• Media coverage of Hurricane Dean (2007)

I've gone and bolded the ones I think we should have. Davnel03 12:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no need for any of these - Dean isn't Katrina. – Chacor 13:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Chacor, your trite comments are very annoying. In response to Davnel03, though, I think that some of them seem like reasonable ways to dillute the page at hand, but others are not as big a deal to worry about, just because there really isn't enough information to base a page on them. If we can just manage this page by cutting down on the sub- and sub-sub- sections like Jdorje said, then I think we're good. I don't think this storm has had enough impact on the world to warrant the status of a Hurricane Katrina, however. Jared (t)  15:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It's called being straightforward. Maybe you should have a look at WP:CIV? – Chacor 15:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed with Chacor. Meteorological history and regional articles are all that are needed. This would be like Hurricane Isabel transposed south and west. Mid-importance (higher end of that), not Top-importance like Katrina. CrazyC83 18:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a particular opinion on how Dean should be handled, but I do think it would be good to look at the successes (Isabel) and failures (Katrina) of previous multi-article storms and make some wikiproject standards for such cases. There are several ways storm information can be divided up - by main article topic (storm history/preparations/impact/aftermath), by region (effects of ... in ...), or by sub-topic (media coverage of ..., ... disaster relief, etc). I think it's important to be consistent in different articles in how we choose to divide them up - and to pick a way that doesn't have TOO MUCH overlap between sub-articles. — jdorje (talk) 20:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I could see a few of the subpages helping out. But only three, like Media coverage, effects by region (if the section gets too long), and disaster relief. Mexico really didn't respond well after T.D. #11 in 1999...the more you look into that one, the more similar it looks to how the US responded to the Gulf coast during Katrina. But I digress since I'm getting off topic. If Mexico were to respond similarly during the aftermath of this hurricane, there would be a case for Criticism of government response. Thegreatdr 22:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Isabel (also at the upper end of Mid-importance) should be the model for this storm due to similar land impacts overall in death tolls (55 vs. 42), damage (both around $3.8B) and widespread land impacts. Katrina is not a good example as that was an unprecedented case and a Top-importance article, plus it was before WP:WPTC and with no real standards. CrazyC83 05:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem with Katrina (as seen in many articles on "new" storms) is more along the lines of having too many cooks. With so many editors adding unsourced and possibly irrelevant information quickly it is very hard to keep things properly structured. It then becomes even harder to go back and add proper structure afterwards. From what I've seen the core editors (which used to include me) have done a better job since then of getting the structure on new articles set up in advance so that others are more likely to fill things into the proper places. Even so when it comes to multi-article storms the multi-article structure should get set up in advance by the core editors, to prevent proliferation of sub-articles that will later just get merged back. This is why I suggest having standards for that (and I agree Isabel, designed from the beginning to be a multi-article storm, should be the benchmark). — jdorje (talk) 06:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Preparations section, Dominican Republic

Yesterday I noticed that the last paragraph of this section includes details about the effect of the storm which is incorrect (it reports only one death). I thought that information did not belong there but on the "Impact" section, which already has accurate information about the extend of damages and deaths. So I removed it (or though I did... I don't know, maybe I dream the whole thing..), but now I see that is back on again.

Anyway, does anybody else agree that information about the impact of the storm should not be included in the "Preparations" section? Ulises Jorge, San Juan, P.R. —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 15:58, August 25, 2007 (UTC).

I reverted it, I've just had a look again and you're right. I assumed they were in the impact section - I apologise for that. You're right, they don't belong in the preps. – Chacor 16:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Structure of multi-article storm article sets

I realize there's a lot of such article sets, including some featured ones like Hurricane Isabel, and there may not be incentive to change any of those. My thinking is that as things are, the sub-articles like Effects_of_Hurricane_Dean_in_the_Greater_Antilles cover more than just effects ("impact"), it includes preparations and aftermath as well. Why not, therefore, have them follow the identical structure of the main articles and stick in storm history as well (in this case, a synoptic history of dean during its stay in the greater antilles). In most cases this would be a rather brief section and would serve as a bit of background for the rest of the article; possibly it could even include a close-up of the track map of the storm in that region. A corollary is that it might then be appropriate to drop the "effects" from the title and just call the article Hurricane Dean in the Greater Antilles...a shorter title is better in general, although that might be a bit confusing I suppose. — jdorje (talk) 20:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I have been intending to work the relevant meteorological details into the Greater and Lesser Antilles articles: not a full storm history, but just the bits that are relevant to the Impact. That's basically what those sections are about after all: The Impact. Preparation and Aftermath just serve to inform the main event. Plasticup ^T/C 02:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is this page size archive ready??

On Weather Channel I heard that Dean is in Riverside County; I have noticed drizzle in Desert Hot Springs, 92240. Other than innumerable drizzle episodes, it has been virtually all drought, all year [January, February?].

So, did Dean die in Riverside & Berdoo??

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[ %c2%a1 ]] [[ %c2%bf ]] [[ %7e%7e ]] ~~ -]] 21:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

That sig gives me cancer, please get rid of it. --Golbez 23:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you can make a case that its remnant mid-level circulation survived southern Baja California 2-3 days ago. Thegreatdr 22:58, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The signature issue is on my page.

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[ %c2%a1 ]] [[ %c2%bf ]] [[ %7e%7e ]] ~~ -]] 01:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] So much for dodging the bullet

I just read an article from the San Francisco Chronicle that used the term "almost flattened" to describe Majahual. Costa Maya was also severly damaged. I saw a picture of a man wading through chest-deep water in Chetumal. Over 100 buildings were severly damaged or destroyed in Majahual and its busy harbor may be closed for up to eight months [1]. I updated the article, but I don't know how to do those fancy citations. If someone could help me, that'd be great. -- §HurricaneERICarchive 23:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I have known quite a bit of info from that region for some time now regarding damage and the material comes form sourced news in Mexico. I will dig through my collection of articles over the coming weeks and if I have the time (a lot of college work), then I will edit a substantial amount in. You guys are great :)! The great kawa 23:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

We have been using the {{cite web}} template in this article. See WP:CITET for details, or click "edit" and reverse engineer one of the existing citations. Also, if you have any un-copyrighted images of the damage they would be greatly appreciated. Plasticup ^T/C 02:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Effects on Jamaica?

What happened to the section on the effects to Jamaica? I have located a source for what happened to the 17 (20 actually) people stranded on the Pedro Cays and some other info. I have to admit, I am incredibly skilled when it comes to locating the effects of hurricanes on regions. ;) The great kawa 23:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, schoolwork's a [female dog] isn't it? I got a little essay due Tuesday. I've been very curious about what happened to those guys (why are you keepin' it a secret from me ;) By all means try to get it in or link it to somebody who's got the time. We'd love to have it. I think Dean may still be making his case for enshrinement. -- §HurricaneERICarchive 00:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Effects of Hurricane Dean in the Greater Antilles Plasticup ^T/C 02:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First Sentence (grammar)

I was looking at this page, and the first sentence seems a bit redundant... if it's the first hurricane of the season, wouldn't it also by default be the first major hurricane of the season? Thehockeydude44 03:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

No. A major hurricane is one that's Cat 3, 4 or 5. A Cat 1 or Cat 2 hurricane isn't a major hurricane. – Chacor 03:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Better landfall picture

To the right is the current landfall picture we have for dean. This is of course from just after landfall. Honestly I just don't like this picture. This picture is I feel better, showing the eye more clearly and being from just before landfall - it's one I saw on wunderground around the time of landfall, but being from weather underground is not free. But whoever it is that specializes in hunting up such pictures, can't we find something better from landfall? — jdorje (talk) 04:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I Found this Image on the BBc the other day and have poasted it on the Seasonal Talk page BBC NewsJason Rees 00:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-protection

Can we take it off again? The event is over and I imagine that vandalism will have returned to normal levels. Plasticup ^T/C 20:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The semi-protection wasn't put in due to vandalism but rather a (now-)banned user violating 3RR using IPs and sockpuppets. – Chacor 01:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Effects/persistence/impacts of remnant low?

Can someone add a section on the spin-down of the remnant low of Dean over the eastern Pacific? Where this has been notible this has been added to other tropical cyclone articles. I think Dean's remnant low was notable, because it lingered for quite a number of days, starting off the west-central coast of Mexico, moved northwestwardds parallel and west of the Baja coast to off the shore of southern California, where it caused unseasonable rains and thunderstorms in the Los Angeles Basin and San Joaquin Valley (I think affecting the raisin crop), and then moved inland into the Mojave Desert, where it caused flash flooding in Las Vegas that led to economic losses and perhaps loss of life in those flash floods. I have only sketchy information on this so I don't think I have enough info to add it in myself. Ferd Blivid 22:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

yes i think it should be added in BUT once the NHC have Released their TCR on it as their is not many Sources on it yet.Jason Rees 01:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What if...

...the night of August 12 and/or morning of August 13, a fleet of heat generating boats, or a veritable army of aircraft carrier based flame-throwers had moved into the mid-Atlantic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.60.209 (talk) 03:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

What would have happened is that a veritable army of boats would be on the Atlantic. If you mean that the storm would have been debilitated somehow, I recommend you read this. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is a start?

Why is an article this extensive labeled a start. It has five subsidiary pages and has a lot of good information. I'm not saying nominate for FA, but B class is most certainly not unreasonable, in fact I think it's in order. -- §HurricaneERICarchive 01:41, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

It's missing a lot of impact info. I'm not sure about whether it should be Start or B myself, but not higher, and not lower than that. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 01:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's no aftermath in the article. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it needs aftermath, maybe more impact, and I am really starting to dislike that table. Juliancolton (talk) 21:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dean Retired?

Apparently, Dr. Lixion Avila mentioned while giving a speech about Dean, Felix and Humberto at the WMO meeting in Orlando that Dean's name was retired and replaced with Dorian. Is Avila enough of a reputable and accurate source that we could mention this in the article? Or should we just wait until the WMO announces all of the retirees? 142.177.235.196 (talk) 05:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Let's wait until we get a source. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Lixion is a source, but if we don't have a link to the speech, we're kind of in the same place as before. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 10:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)