![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 1914 Atlantic hurricane season has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This page looks better than before.Any questions? 70.----.122 is my school IP-i just change it into the username. Changes:
1) Storm has own section
2) ACE box created
3) Storm has own infobox
4) Storm has more information (I watched my grammar)
5) Page has button bar-I will move button bar to template when i get home. HurricaneCraze32
According to Hurdat, the storm peaked at 70 mph. In addition, the site says there were two other storms being investigated for inclusion in the database, but lack of tropical characteristics kept them removed. A way to expand the article would be to mention those two, if needed. Hurricanehink 19:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Fellas...the one, only, everlasting, official, single source for 1851-2005 Atlantic storms is the NHC best-track data. The main page to look at is http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/Data_Storm.html - this has links to the pages quoted by both Rattleman (though I think that page shows *landfalling* winds not peak winds, despite that they call it "max winds") and Hink. The link hink gives is good reading, but just looking at the easy-to-read data (listed in the link above) at http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/easyhurdat_5104.html#1914_1 will show you that the storm had 70 mph winds. — jdorje ( talk) 19:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Be sure to add in the possible storms, mentioned by Hurdat. Also, try and use the raw data to provide more data for the lone storm. The raw data includes rainfall totals and wind speeds. Hurricanehink ( talk) 00:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I put this as mid-importance, seeing as it was the least active Atlantic hurricane season in recorded history. Hurricanehink ( talk) 22:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
There definitely should be more information out there you can find on TS-1. Especially if it was the only storm this season all documentations of the 1914 season should give ample information on it. Personally as a WPTC member I think this is far from GA class; it isn't even a B-class article. It needs quite a bit of work. – Ch acor 02:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Overall, it needs a fresh rewrite, more info, and better grammar and word choice. Hurricanehink ( talk) 19:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any actual storm history for the storm? Where did it come from? Why did it move on its path? A storm that struck Georgia and later removed into the Gulf of Mexico is unusual. How did it happen?
This is not a modern storm, the only actual storm history is the one written in the MWR and searching on the internet for more SH is useless b/c it problaby wasnt detected untill it was off the coast of georgia. (remember there TC obervation back then was limited to ship reports). The Why did it move on its path and how did it happen is compeletly unncesary unless its specificly mentions in the MWR (which is possbily the Only source) that has any info about the storm.
thats all i have to say for now. Storm05 13:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
No, we don't need a whole section for extratropical storms that weren't part of the season. Just mention in the lede about the storms that HURDAT mention are being looked at for inclusion. – Ch acor 15:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the "possible storms" should be removed. The link provided mentions that they were extratropical systems (with the second system "perhaps" but not "definitely" being a TD). Extratropical cyclones and tropical disturbances that aren't declared tropical depressions or higher are not part of the hurricane season, whether they're mentioned in the report or not, and don't belong in the article. -- Core desat 23:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't that be listed at 2007 in the refs, not 1914? HURDAT didn't predate the 1960's. Also, COADS or ICOADS for the ship database? One should be chosen for the red wikilinks, because only one article will be created for the project, ultimately. Thegreatdr ( talk) 14:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Canadian Paul 05:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I will be reviewing this article in the near future, hopefully tomorrow. Canadian Paul 05:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
...and here it is!
That's really it - there were some smaller issues that needed fixing with the prose, but I've tidied those up. To allow you to address this concern, I am putting the article on hold for a period of up to seven days. I'm always open to discussion, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up in real life, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 05:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 1914 Atlantic hurricane season has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This page looks better than before.Any questions? 70.----.122 is my school IP-i just change it into the username. Changes:
1) Storm has own section
2) ACE box created
3) Storm has own infobox
4) Storm has more information (I watched my grammar)
5) Page has button bar-I will move button bar to template when i get home. HurricaneCraze32
According to Hurdat, the storm peaked at 70 mph. In addition, the site says there were two other storms being investigated for inclusion in the database, but lack of tropical characteristics kept them removed. A way to expand the article would be to mention those two, if needed. Hurricanehink 19:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Fellas...the one, only, everlasting, official, single source for 1851-2005 Atlantic storms is the NHC best-track data. The main page to look at is http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/Data_Storm.html - this has links to the pages quoted by both Rattleman (though I think that page shows *landfalling* winds not peak winds, despite that they call it "max winds") and Hink. The link hink gives is good reading, but just looking at the easy-to-read data (listed in the link above) at http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/easyhurdat_5104.html#1914_1 will show you that the storm had 70 mph winds. — jdorje ( talk) 19:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Be sure to add in the possible storms, mentioned by Hurdat. Also, try and use the raw data to provide more data for the lone storm. The raw data includes rainfall totals and wind speeds. Hurricanehink ( talk) 00:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I put this as mid-importance, seeing as it was the least active Atlantic hurricane season in recorded history. Hurricanehink ( talk) 22:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
There definitely should be more information out there you can find on TS-1. Especially if it was the only storm this season all documentations of the 1914 season should give ample information on it. Personally as a WPTC member I think this is far from GA class; it isn't even a B-class article. It needs quite a bit of work. – Ch acor 02:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Overall, it needs a fresh rewrite, more info, and better grammar and word choice. Hurricanehink ( talk) 19:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any actual storm history for the storm? Where did it come from? Why did it move on its path? A storm that struck Georgia and later removed into the Gulf of Mexico is unusual. How did it happen?
This is not a modern storm, the only actual storm history is the one written in the MWR and searching on the internet for more SH is useless b/c it problaby wasnt detected untill it was off the coast of georgia. (remember there TC obervation back then was limited to ship reports). The Why did it move on its path and how did it happen is compeletly unncesary unless its specificly mentions in the MWR (which is possbily the Only source) that has any info about the storm.
thats all i have to say for now. Storm05 13:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
No, we don't need a whole section for extratropical storms that weren't part of the season. Just mention in the lede about the storms that HURDAT mention are being looked at for inclusion. – Ch acor 15:26, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the "possible storms" should be removed. The link provided mentions that they were extratropical systems (with the second system "perhaps" but not "definitely" being a TD). Extratropical cyclones and tropical disturbances that aren't declared tropical depressions or higher are not part of the hurricane season, whether they're mentioned in the report or not, and don't belong in the article. -- Core desat 23:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't that be listed at 2007 in the refs, not 1914? HURDAT didn't predate the 1960's. Also, COADS or ICOADS for the ship database? One should be chosen for the red wikilinks, because only one article will be created for the project, ultimately. Thegreatdr ( talk) 14:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Canadian Paul 05:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I will be reviewing this article in the near future, hopefully tomorrow. Canadian Paul 05:16, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
...and here it is!
That's really it - there were some smaller issues that needed fixing with the prose, but I've tidied those up. To allow you to address this concern, I am putting the article on hold for a period of up to seven days. I'm always open to discussion, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up in real life, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 05:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)