Talk:Hurricane Joan-Miriam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Good article Hurricane Joan-Miriam was a nominee for good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

An image is needed to go in the infobox. Jdorje 01:19, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Here is a rare image.

Hurricanehink 02:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Damnit! I spent the time to convert the pdf version of that when an html version is right here!. That image may be copyrighted anyway. -- Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 22:24, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Deaths

In http://www.crid.or.cr/digitalizacion/pdf/spa/doc2604/doc2604-b.pdf, page 1, says that there were 148 deaths in Nicaragua (The other unaccounted deaths are not included in the chart, I think only confirmed deaths should be included). I changed the value in the impact chart, since only were 148 deaths. NOTE: This is a very reliable source, since it cites many numbers from NHC.

Death Tolls by Country
Country Deaths
Nicaragua 148 [1]
Costa Rica 28-46
Colombia 25
Venezuela 11
Panama 4
Total 216-234

juan andrés 01:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

In the page [2], there is a lot of information about Joan in Nicaragua. Since there is a lot of information for one country, do I have to synthesize the information too? juan andrés 02:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Basically, add all the info you can if you like. Just remember to cite it. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
What happend to the costa rica deaths? It says 28-46 in the table above but in the article it was changed to just 28. The change message said "see talk page" but the talk pages gives the range! So what is the source for this number? — jdorje (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
No clue. íslenskur fellibylur #12 (samtal) 12:17, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Busy

The reason of lack of actualization by my part is because I'm busy with school (homework). 201.143.117.26 01:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
User:201.143.117.26 it's me. juan andrés 02:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article nomination has failed

The Good article nomination for Hurricane Joan-Miriam has failed, for the following reason:

A few things need correcting.
  1. There is a contradiction between Joan-Miriam was the final hurricane of the 1988 Atlantic hurricane season and One of the latest Cape Verde-type hurricanes, unless by 'one of the latest' you mean one of the latest recorded in any season.
  2. In a brighter note, public health measures managed to keep the death toll lower than it could have been - I think this needs more detail - what were the measures? Also, should be 'on' not 'in'.
  3. The hurricane also ruined agriculture in the country - seems a very extreme statement. 'Severely damaged', perhaps, or 'wreaked havoc on', but 'ruined' has connotations of permanent damage.
  4. The hurricane also destroyed most of Nicaragua's remaining rain forests - I am quite sure that's not true - the reference says that the hurricane destroyed much of the remaining forest cover in many of the areas, not in the whole country.
  5. The hurricane destroyed most of the infrastructure in Nicaragua - I am sure this is not true either - I could believe that in some places most of the infrastructure was destroyed, but not over the entire country.
  6. The slow response to requests for aid was contributed to by the Sandanista Government's actions, which were viewed as undermining the peace process championed by Oscar Arias. - very controversial statement! Which actions are you referring to, and who viewed them as undermining the peace process? Mind that you don't let bias inherent in one source creep into the article.
Otherwise, all is good. If you renominate once these things are looked at I will add it to the GA list. Worldtraveller 10:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the nomination again:
  1. The main problem remains that you're carrying over POV from references into the article. The sentence I pointed out before remains unchanged. It was the view of 'many European governments' that the Sandinistas were openly defying the peace process, according to your reference, which looks to have an anti-Sandinista tone anyway, and yet you're saying the actions 'were viewed' without specifying by whom. This needs correcting.
  2. Under 'Nicaragua' you've got several very short paragraphs which should be merged for better flow.
  3. The losses to cash crops severely reduced exports to under 200 million dollars (1988 USD) - need to say what previous value was for this to be meaningful.
  4. Bluefields was hit with "explosive impact" - why not use your own wording instead of lifting a description verbatim from a source?
  5. Only seven other storms have matched this feat - a storm cannot achieve a feat - it's a word which applies only to human endeavours. Worldtraveller 11:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA nom On Hold

The lede is pretty short. Parts of the storm history could use more explaination and info in general. Locations would be nice. The Lesser Antilles, South America, and Mexico sections in the impact are all stubby and should be expanded as much as possible. Metric units are needed, as well. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:55, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Also the link on reference number 4 is broken. --Banana04131 18:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
It would be necessary to make sure that the issues from the previous four nominations are dealt with. As I do see that as having happened, I am inclined to fail this again. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 18:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I failed it due to lack of any work on it. Hurricanehink (talk) 04:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Potential improvement

What needs to be worked on at the moment? Juliancolton (talk) 17:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Using convert templates to include SI would be a good start. The lead should probably be expanded. The red wikilink situation in this article needs to be resolved. Thegreatdr (talk) 04:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)