Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/1951 Hawaii cyclone"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Yellow Evan (cmt) |
imported>Orlady (looks OK to me) |
||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
* [[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Sorry but the sources are very obscure, I think you are going to have to add a note to the article explaining how you derived this information from those statistics. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 14:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC) | * [[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Sorry but the sources are very obscure, I think you are going to have to add a note to the article explaining how you derived this information from those statistics. [[User:Gatoclass|Gatoclass]] ([[User talk:Gatoclass|talk]]) 14:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
:*What makes them so obscure? This has never been a problem for other hurricane articles for DYK that use similar info. [[User:Yellow Evan|Y]][[User talk:Yellow Evan|E]] [[2014 PHS|<font color="#66666"><sup>Pacific</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Yellow Evan|<sup>Hurricane</sup></font>]] 16:49, 30 June 2014 (UTC) | :*What makes them so obscure? This has never been a problem for other hurricane articles for DYK that use similar info. [[User:Yellow Evan|Y]][[User talk:Yellow Evan|E]] [[2014 PHS|<font color="#66666"><sup>Pacific</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Yellow Evan|<sup>Hurricane</sup></font>]] 16:49, 30 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
+ | ::*The sourcing looks sufficient to me. Between the storm track maps, the tables, and the text in source #1, the content of the article seems to be supported. It seems to me that this is a bit like some sports-related articles that rely heavily on statistics charts. I can't interpret all of the sources here, but the article is consistent with those sources that I can interpret. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 18:41, 1 July 2014 (UTC) | ||
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
Revision as of 18:41, 1 July 2014
DYK toolbox |
---|
1951 Hawaii cyclone
- Comment: Going to review another DYK, even though I don't have to QPQ. (Start training :P)
Moved to mainspace by CycloneIsaac (talk). Self nominated at 21:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC).
New enough, long enough, adequately referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. I'm wondering, though, where you got all that information in the first paragraph under Meteorological history – are you interpreting the statistical charts in footnotes 2 and 3? Per DYK rules, you need to add a cite after the sentences describing the second and third landfalls. Also, I suggest adding "in 1951" to the hook to place it in context. No QPQ needed for under-5 DYKs nominator. Yoninah (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- I added a few more cites to footnotes 2 and 3 for the other two landfalls. I am proposing an alt hook, with your suggestion.
- ALT 1:...that in 1951, a cyclone made landfall in Hawaii three times?
- —CycloneIsaac (Talk) 20:56, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. What about my question about the statistical data? Yoninah (talk) 21:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- IBTRACS and best track are statistical data, and I was interpreting it.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 23:08, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry but the sources are very obscure, I think you are going to have to add a note to the article explaining how you derived this information from those statistics. Gatoclass (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- What makes them so obscure? This has never been a problem for other hurricane articles for DYK that use similar info. YE Pacific Hurricane 16:49, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- The sourcing looks sufficient to me. Between the storm track maps, the tables, and the text in source #1, the content of the article seems to be supported. It seems to me that this is a bit like some sports-related articles that rely heavily on statistics charts. I can't interpret all of the sources here, but the article is consistent with those sources that I can interpret. --Orlady (talk) 18:41, 1 July 2014 (UTC)