This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hurricane Emily (2005) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
Hurricane Emily (2005) was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 17 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Hurricane Emily. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Shorter intro, more structure (subsections). Jdorje 03:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
The intro (and numerous other places) say that Emily broke dennis's nine-day-old record for July intensity. But such a claim of precision is very dubious. Dennis reached 150 mph/938 mbar on July 8 at 1200 UTC breaking Audrey's record (145 mph/946 mbar) then. However, it reached peak strength 140 mph/929 mbar on July 10 at 1200 UTC in the Gulf. Thus Dennis broke Audrey's record on the 8th and then broke its own record on the 10th. Emily broke Dennis's record reaching 155/929 on the 16th (pending TCR). I changed the wording in the intro to "just six days before" but it might be safer to be a little more fuzzy with "less than two weeks earlier". — jdorje ( talk) 18:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for the correct estimate? It looks like the number in the infobox was taken from the estimate for Mexico alone. I was hoping the TCR would clear this up, but it hasn't. ETA: I changed the casualty figures to agree with what was in the TCR. Feel free to add a citation, although I didn't feel the need to since we are not doing this for all storms. Good kitty 22:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I believe the Texas damage estimates cited are both contradictory and dubious. The article states that there was "no significant structural damage," but then immediately afterward states that "several homes were destroyed." Are destroyed homes not significant structural damage? Building damages in Texas are subsequentlky estimated at $125,000. Again, if "several" homes were actually destroyed, the damages would almost certainly be well in excess of $125,000, even in the poor Rio Grande Valley area of south Texas. Finally, the $178 million figure for south Texas crop losses is surely overstated. Such massive losses would have devestated agriculture in the Rio Grande Valley. Original sources may have provided these figures and information; but they are inaccurate nonetheless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.163.90.86 ( talk) 01:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Since the name wasn't retired, should we abolish the redirect? I am not sure about this, so others should have their say. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
As I see it we have two choices.
The current method of redirecting Hurricane Emily to this article is bad. If we're going to do that we should just give this article the main name. However I do realize there's a lot of links to be fixed before we change the redirect. — jdorje ( talk) 02:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Considering Emily won't be used for another 6 years, I think it should be at Hurricane Emily, without the year. Hurricanehink 13:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
The only links to Emily which redirect from the main page to (2005) are in userspace, WP pages or talk pages - none from articles. If Emily is moved back to the main page, redirects through (2005) arent harmful are they? Nilfanion 22:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Is the damage estimate for Grenada for the insured damage, or is total damages? Let me know soon okay.-- Lionheart Omega 15:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
The storm history section is nicely written, but I'm concerned with the patchiness of the impact section. By my count there are four paragraphs that contain only one sentence, and another two paragraphs that contain only two. It gives the impression that you're trying to stretch a limited amount of information further than it can confortably be stretched. Can you edit this section so that it flows a bit more naturally, and perhaps add a few more details? MLilburne 11:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 03:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
This warrants inclusion: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2005/jul/emily-satellite.gif Plasticup T/ C 03:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
This section is for the cumulative fatalities and damages which will be listed by country.
Cyclonebiskit ( talk) 00:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved; request withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Laurdecl talk 02:20, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Hurricane Emily (2005) →
Hurricane Emily – Obviously the most notorious Emily of all, was earliest C5 on record in the Atlantic and caused $1 billion in damages. More then enough to qualify as having the main title.
MarioProtIV (
talk/
contribs)
19:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Fine, I withdraw the request per your reasons. -- MarioProtIV ( talk/ contribs) 22:21, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hurricane Emily (2005). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:40, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
More needs to be reported on Emily's significance and the changes that she brought to South Texas. Damage was not as high as in the past, but she brought changes that linger to this day and have become a part of family lore for hundreds of thousands of Texans. No one will ever forget Emily, but we may forgive, as time goes by. Meanwhile, the next generations should be made aware of the storm's incredible impact and significance on our daily lives, even today. 169.252.4.21 ( talk) 08:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)HWatcher
Dude, I think you are the only person in Texas who will "never forget" Emily, it was not a particularly bad storm, and it is not a part of "family lore" for hundreds of thousands of people in Texas. Come on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.21 ( talk) 13:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Hurricane Emily (2005). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This article clearly fails GA. The coverage this article has is less than impressive. There are other problems as well. If you act like a duck and quack like a duck, you are a duck. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 🇺🇸 01:34, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Overall damage was fairly minor to moderate as the island were still repairing from a much more destructive and powerful storm such as Ivan, 10 months ago.Does not belong here.
The storm weakened slightly as it continued westward, and remained a Category 4 while passing south of Jamaica and, on July 17, the Cayman Islands. Emily continued on its nearly straight track to the west-northwest, weakening somewhat but remaining at Category 4 until striking Cozumel just before mainland landfall at Playa del Carmen at 06:30 UTC on July 18. Sustained winds were 135 mph (215 km/h), and the eyewall passed directly over Cozumel.Unsourced.
I am completely rewriting the MH in my sandbox, using more sources and making it larger. Stay safe, Cyclone Toby 12:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 21:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. No evidence that this article is the primary topic. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works (contribs) 19:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Hurricane Emily (2005) → Hurricane Emily – The name was Good without a (2005) 119.94.56.230 ( talk) 09:02, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Hurricane Emily (2005) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
Hurricane Emily (2005) was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 17 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Hurricane Emily. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Shorter intro, more structure (subsections). Jdorje 03:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
The intro (and numerous other places) say that Emily broke dennis's nine-day-old record for July intensity. But such a claim of precision is very dubious. Dennis reached 150 mph/938 mbar on July 8 at 1200 UTC breaking Audrey's record (145 mph/946 mbar) then. However, it reached peak strength 140 mph/929 mbar on July 10 at 1200 UTC in the Gulf. Thus Dennis broke Audrey's record on the 8th and then broke its own record on the 10th. Emily broke Dennis's record reaching 155/929 on the 16th (pending TCR). I changed the wording in the intro to "just six days before" but it might be safer to be a little more fuzzy with "less than two weeks earlier". — jdorje ( talk) 18:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone have a source for the correct estimate? It looks like the number in the infobox was taken from the estimate for Mexico alone. I was hoping the TCR would clear this up, but it hasn't. ETA: I changed the casualty figures to agree with what was in the TCR. Feel free to add a citation, although I didn't feel the need to since we are not doing this for all storms. Good kitty 22:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
I believe the Texas damage estimates cited are both contradictory and dubious. The article states that there was "no significant structural damage," but then immediately afterward states that "several homes were destroyed." Are destroyed homes not significant structural damage? Building damages in Texas are subsequentlky estimated at $125,000. Again, if "several" homes were actually destroyed, the damages would almost certainly be well in excess of $125,000, even in the poor Rio Grande Valley area of south Texas. Finally, the $178 million figure for south Texas crop losses is surely overstated. Such massive losses would have devestated agriculture in the Rio Grande Valley. Original sources may have provided these figures and information; but they are inaccurate nonetheless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.163.90.86 ( talk) 01:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Since the name wasn't retired, should we abolish the redirect? I am not sure about this, so others should have their say. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
As I see it we have two choices.
The current method of redirecting Hurricane Emily to this article is bad. If we're going to do that we should just give this article the main name. However I do realize there's a lot of links to be fixed before we change the redirect. — jdorje ( talk) 02:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Considering Emily won't be used for another 6 years, I think it should be at Hurricane Emily, without the year. Hurricanehink 13:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
The only links to Emily which redirect from the main page to (2005) are in userspace, WP pages or talk pages - none from articles. If Emily is moved back to the main page, redirects through (2005) arent harmful are they? Nilfanion 22:28, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Is the damage estimate for Grenada for the insured damage, or is total damages? Let me know soon okay.-- Lionheart Omega 15:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
The storm history section is nicely written, but I'm concerned with the patchiness of the impact section. By my count there are four paragraphs that contain only one sentence, and another two paragraphs that contain only two. It gives the impression that you're trying to stretch a limited amount of information further than it can confortably be stretched. Can you edit this section so that it flows a bit more naturally, and perhaps add a few more details? MLilburne 11:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! -- Nehrams2020 ( talk) 03:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
This warrants inclusion: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2005/jul/emily-satellite.gif Plasticup T/ C 03:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
This section is for the cumulative fatalities and damages which will be listed by country.
Cyclonebiskit ( talk) 00:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved; request withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) Laurdecl talk 02:20, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Hurricane Emily (2005) →
Hurricane Emily – Obviously the most notorious Emily of all, was earliest C5 on record in the Atlantic and caused $1 billion in damages. More then enough to qualify as having the main title.
MarioProtIV (
talk/
contribs)
19:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Fine, I withdraw the request per your reasons. -- MarioProtIV ( talk/ contribs) 22:21, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hurricane Emily (2005). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:40, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
More needs to be reported on Emily's significance and the changes that she brought to South Texas. Damage was not as high as in the past, but she brought changes that linger to this day and have become a part of family lore for hundreds of thousands of Texans. No one will ever forget Emily, but we may forgive, as time goes by. Meanwhile, the next generations should be made aware of the storm's incredible impact and significance on our daily lives, even today. 169.252.4.21 ( talk) 08:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)HWatcher
Dude, I think you are the only person in Texas who will "never forget" Emily, it was not a particularly bad storm, and it is not a part of "family lore" for hundreds of thousands of people in Texas. Come on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.21 ( talk) 13:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Hurricane Emily (2005). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This article clearly fails GA. The coverage this article has is less than impressive. There are other problems as well. If you act like a duck and quack like a duck, you are a duck. ~ Destroyeraa 🌀 🇺🇸 01:34, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Overall damage was fairly minor to moderate as the island were still repairing from a much more destructive and powerful storm such as Ivan, 10 months ago.Does not belong here.
The storm weakened slightly as it continued westward, and remained a Category 4 while passing south of Jamaica and, on July 17, the Cayman Islands. Emily continued on its nearly straight track to the west-northwest, weakening somewhat but remaining at Category 4 until striking Cozumel just before mainland landfall at Playa del Carmen at 06:30 UTC on July 18. Sustained winds were 135 mph (215 km/h), and the eyewall passed directly over Cozumel.Unsourced.
I am completely rewriting the MH in my sandbox, using more sources and making it larger. Stay safe, Cyclone Toby 12:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 21:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. No evidence that this article is the primary topic. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works (contribs) 19:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Hurricane Emily (2005) → Hurricane Emily – The name was Good without a (2005) 119.94.56.230 ( talk) 09:02, 17 April 2023 (UTC)