Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk) 16:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Few things.

• It evolved into a separate vortex, and due to the lack of inhibiting wind shear, a small tropical system developed - maybe say a small cyclone developed, or something, as the next sentence says it was subtropical. Alternately, at the end of that sentence, say "a small subtropical storm developed at 0000  UTC on November 25." Or something.
• When was it named?
  • I reworded that sentence, since I don't think the storm's naming was a notable feature independent of its classification. – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 23:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply
• You should mention the peak intensity was estimated (and how that intensity was estimated).
  • I'm not sure I understand. No statistics on tropical cyclones are guaranteed to be exactly accurate, so everything is therefore estimated. – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 23:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply
    • But how did they estimate Karl's intensity? Usually it's through Recon or Dvorak technique, and it's probably not Recon given the location... ♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk) 00:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC) reply
• On November 27, the storm's eye became more ragged - any way you can merge that small sentence somewhere else?
• I think you should mention when the hurricane season is somewhere in there, how Karl developed less than a week from the end.
• You should specify that Karl maintained hurricane status further north than any other since Lois. Otherwise, it seems that Karl does for any tropical cyclone.
• You should also specify that the record for most November hurricanes is two. Also, find a way to link Hurricane Jeanne (1980) in there.

I'm too lazy to do all of the on hold stuff, since all of this is so easy. Just let me know when you get these so I can pass it. :) ♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk) 16:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply

Everything else is done. Nice review, thanks! – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 23:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC) reply