This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
project page for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Good job finding so much impact. It needs a copyedit, more MH, and better references (the last two refs don't have full dates, they just have months/years).
YEPacificHurricane15:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)reply
"The 15th named storm and 12th hurricane of the active 1984 Pacific hurricane season" - Please spell-out 15th and 12th to fifteenth and twelfth, respectively.
"about 297 kilometers (185 miles) south of Acapulco" - For consistency with the rest of the article, switch the miles and the kilometers so that the miles is outside the parenthesis.
"active 1984 Pacific hurricane season developed from a tropical disturbance" - It appears that you are missing a word here, which I would assume to be "Odile" between "season" and "developed". After adding the word "Odile", place a comma following it.
This is how it currently reads: "the active 1984 Pacific hurricane season developed from a tropical disturbance"; I don't know about you, but I don't think the 1984 PHS, as a whole, developed from a tropical disturbance.--
12george1 (
talk)
03:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)reply
The lead is a rather vague summary of the impact. Why not add info about the 900 homes damaged, the evacuation of 7,000 people, 80% of crops damaged in Guerrero, ect.?
"Six deaths were reported, and two people were reported missing." - Use should avoid using the word "reported" twice in one sentence. I would suggest re-wording to something such as this: "Overall, the storm caused six deaths occurred, and two other people were reported missing."
"It weakened to a Category 1 hurricane early on September 22." - Either I am missing something, the track map is incorrect, or the newspaper article is wrong. While the storm was approaching the coast, you can see that the storm suddenly weakened from a Category 2 to a tropical storm near landfall, skipping Category 1 intensity, or very quickly passing through it.
You are correct, actually, the newspaper is based off of real-time data.
YEPacificHurricane
"According to press reports in Mexico City, officials warned that illness may occur due to a lack of of drinking water could occur." - I don't see any need for the words "could occur" on the end.
"7,000 people, and did leave 20,000 families without any water service." - Technically this isn't a grammar error. However, it would be better to say: "7,000 people, and left 20,000 families without any water service."
"The tourism resorts in these areas were also affected by Hurricane Norbert just a week after Odile hit." - How can that be? Norbert dissipated only four days after Odile. So how could the tourism resorts be affected one week later?
"Throughout the country, rainfall fell in 2201 locations." - Is this really necessary? We have never mentioned facts like these on other tropical cyclone articles.
For reference #3, the title is incorrect (Hurricane Odile - September 16-24, 1984), the author is missing (Roth, David M.), the date is incorrect (April 2, 2007), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shouldn't be in the work parameter.
Why should NOAA not be in the work thingy? but fixed the rest.
YEPacificHurricane
On reference #4, you need to include the Associated Press. You can do this by adding the "|agency=" parameter to cite news, and then type in or copy/cut and paste it there.
"in flooding that flooded 30 highways" - Thanks you adding a better summary of impact to the lead. However, there is two problems here. First, you should say "flooding that flooded"; it probably should be reworded to something like "in flooding that inundated 30 highways". Second, the storm did not flood "30 highways", it flooded "30 miles of highways".
I can't find a very good way to word this, I honestly don't know what "inundated" mean, so I found a way to word it, not sure if it makes sense though.
YEPacificHurricane16:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)reply
"forced the evacuation of 40,000 homes." - Hmm, I didn't know that homes could evacuate. I think you mean: "forced the evacuation of 40,000 people".
"While maintaining peak intensity for a day, the cyclone" - Hold on, on the track map, it shows that the storm was a Category 2 hurricane (its peak intensity) for only two dots (12 hours), so why do you say it maintained its peak intensity for a day, which implies at 24 hours?
The rainfall information should probably be mentioned first, because that is how the flooding was caused. Though I would first reword that sentence with the peak rainfall total from "The maximum rainfall totals were recorded in Costa Azul and Acapulco, where it caused over 24.73 in (628 mm) of rainfall." to "Heavy rainfall occurred in southwestern Mexico, especially in Costa Azul and Acapulco, where precipitation peaked at 24.73 in (628 mm)."
I see the recent copyedit made. However, there are still many problems with this article, and it some cases, I don't even know where to begin. Despite that extensive review I gave it, I am still unsatisfied with the article. If I were you, I would check a recently passed GA just to give you an idea of what a GA really looks like; you should especially learn how to write a better lead. So you wanna know my decision for this article? Fail. Sorry, but I am no longer rubber-stamping the articles you nominate for GA (in contrast to last year) that are either of poor quality or little is done to fix the problems. No offense YE, but when I first looked at this article, it looked like it would be generous calling the article C-class, IMO. Sorry, but as I had earlier, I am going to fail this article.--
12george1 (
talk)
03:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)reply
First and foremost, you need to get the status on the hundreds of missing people. If true, that could make Odile one of the deadliest Pacific hurricanes ever. Surely such a high death total would be mentioned in some newspapers, even if it was the 40. However,
this is the only one in a Google news search for [Mexico deaths] in September and October of 1984, so something doesn't seem right. Where does the source that gives the 40 deaths get its info from?
This list of Mexican disasters only lists the
San Juanico Disaster as occurring in 1984, no mention of Odile. I do see a few sources when looking up "mexico muertos 1984 huracan" that brings up the exact same wording for "Odilia" in 1984 that caused 40 deaths and hundreds of people missing, but none of them go into any further detail. So, I'm a little skeptical about that total.
But I pointed out a source from the United Nations that included much less deadly storms. I just find it quite odd that there is no mention for those 40 deaths other than that one source. Can you provide an additional source that verifies the 40 deaths that does not have that exact same wording? And furthermore, you should find out about the hundreds of missing people. It was 28 years ago! I don't know what you mean by "This is Mexico, after all." Aside from being slightly racist, the country is well-developed and would likely have some record of a hurricane killing hundreds of people in the 1980s. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Also, the source was published in 2007, while the the UN source could be older? Mexican storms tend to have tons of missing ppl in them, Cristina 96 and Kiko 07 are good examples of this.
YEPacificHurricane16:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)reply
"and was downgraded to a tropical storm shortly before landfall, which was northwest of Zihuatanejo" - cut down the last portion to "shortly before landfall at Zihuatanejo".
"The depression began to curve more towards the northwest of a narrow ridge located over southern Mexico" - I don't see how that's possible, considering the storm was offshore Mexico. How could it be northwest of a ridge over Mexico?
"the depression was upgraded to Tropical Storm Odile" - who did this?
"the EPHC reported that Odile had attained hurricane status while turning towards the east" - based on what for the intensity? And why did it turn east?
"Late on September 21, Hurricane Odile reached its peak intensity of 105 mph (165 km/h) (a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale) as it approached Acapulco." - how was that intensity ascertained?
"While maintaining peak intensity for a half of a day, the cyclone began to turn more northwestward in response to the weakening of the ridge." - you just said it was because of the trough that it turned to the northwest. Which one was it?
Now there seems to be a bit of a redundancy. You say that the trough caused the storm to turn to the west-northwest, and that the weakening ridge turned it to the northwest. That seems to be just one event. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)--♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
"the cloud pattern of Odile moved northwest, passing east of Manzanillo before weakening as it re-curved towards Texas" - how can the cloud pattern weaken if the storm was no longer a tropical cyclone?
But how? I understand if the cloud pattern becomes disorganized, but weakens implies intensity, which implies a circulation, but if it wasn't a TC, I don't see how it can weaken after it was no longer a TC. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
"According to press reports in Mexico City, officials warned that illness may occur due to overflowed sewers and a lack of drinking water." - how is this related to Odile for what happened in Mexico City?
"Due to flooding from a combination of storms before Odile, over 40,000 people evacuated their homes due to flooding in Acapulco." - can you avoid saying "due to flooding" twice in the same sentence?
"In addition, 11 people died when they were washed away in their homes." - was this due to Odile? The newspaper said "washed away during storms before Odile hit"
" In all, Odile brought the heaviest rains to the region since 1978." - the newspaper said that the rains before Odile were the heaviest, not the storm itself.
"Due to heavy rainfall, the ongoing floods in Mexico continued. Acapulco Mayor Alfonso Arugdin Alcaraz reported that flooding damaged roughly 900 homes, inundated 30 miles (50 km) of highways, triggered an evacuation of 7,000 people, and left 20,000 families without water service." - none of this is cited by ref 4
"In Mexico City, flooding streets brought traffic jams. Many homes were on the brink of collapse, though damage through the city was considered relatively minor. About 80% of the crops in the state of Guerrero were damaged." - I don't think any of this was due to Odile. For Mexico City, the article said Odile's rain was minimal, but there was "unusually heavy rainfall this season", so it's not clear if the traffic jams were from the hurricane. Ditto with the homes on collapse - that wasn't Odile. And the crops in Guerrero is similarly unclear, but the context implies it was due to preceding rainfall.
The evacuations in Acapulco should be removed, as that was caused by the previous storms. Notice how it says "flooding had forced the evacuations...", right after a paragraph saying "damaged an already battered area". --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Hurricane Odile (1984). 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).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
project page for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Good job finding so much impact. It needs a copyedit, more MH, and better references (the last two refs don't have full dates, they just have months/years).
YEPacificHurricane15:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)reply
"The 15th named storm and 12th hurricane of the active 1984 Pacific hurricane season" - Please spell-out 15th and 12th to fifteenth and twelfth, respectively.
"about 297 kilometers (185 miles) south of Acapulco" - For consistency with the rest of the article, switch the miles and the kilometers so that the miles is outside the parenthesis.
"active 1984 Pacific hurricane season developed from a tropical disturbance" - It appears that you are missing a word here, which I would assume to be "Odile" between "season" and "developed". After adding the word "Odile", place a comma following it.
This is how it currently reads: "the active 1984 Pacific hurricane season developed from a tropical disturbance"; I don't know about you, but I don't think the 1984 PHS, as a whole, developed from a tropical disturbance.--
12george1 (
talk)
03:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)reply
The lead is a rather vague summary of the impact. Why not add info about the 900 homes damaged, the evacuation of 7,000 people, 80% of crops damaged in Guerrero, ect.?
"Six deaths were reported, and two people were reported missing." - Use should avoid using the word "reported" twice in one sentence. I would suggest re-wording to something such as this: "Overall, the storm caused six deaths occurred, and two other people were reported missing."
"It weakened to a Category 1 hurricane early on September 22." - Either I am missing something, the track map is incorrect, or the newspaper article is wrong. While the storm was approaching the coast, you can see that the storm suddenly weakened from a Category 2 to a tropical storm near landfall, skipping Category 1 intensity, or very quickly passing through it.
You are correct, actually, the newspaper is based off of real-time data.
YEPacificHurricane
"According to press reports in Mexico City, officials warned that illness may occur due to a lack of of drinking water could occur." - I don't see any need for the words "could occur" on the end.
"7,000 people, and did leave 20,000 families without any water service." - Technically this isn't a grammar error. However, it would be better to say: "7,000 people, and left 20,000 families without any water service."
"The tourism resorts in these areas were also affected by Hurricane Norbert just a week after Odile hit." - How can that be? Norbert dissipated only four days after Odile. So how could the tourism resorts be affected one week later?
"Throughout the country, rainfall fell in 2201 locations." - Is this really necessary? We have never mentioned facts like these on other tropical cyclone articles.
For reference #3, the title is incorrect (Hurricane Odile - September 16-24, 1984), the author is missing (Roth, David M.), the date is incorrect (April 2, 2007), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shouldn't be in the work parameter.
Why should NOAA not be in the work thingy? but fixed the rest.
YEPacificHurricane
On reference #4, you need to include the Associated Press. You can do this by adding the "|agency=" parameter to cite news, and then type in or copy/cut and paste it there.
"in flooding that flooded 30 highways" - Thanks you adding a better summary of impact to the lead. However, there is two problems here. First, you should say "flooding that flooded"; it probably should be reworded to something like "in flooding that inundated 30 highways". Second, the storm did not flood "30 highways", it flooded "30 miles of highways".
I can't find a very good way to word this, I honestly don't know what "inundated" mean, so I found a way to word it, not sure if it makes sense though.
YEPacificHurricane16:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)reply
"forced the evacuation of 40,000 homes." - Hmm, I didn't know that homes could evacuate. I think you mean: "forced the evacuation of 40,000 people".
"While maintaining peak intensity for a day, the cyclone" - Hold on, on the track map, it shows that the storm was a Category 2 hurricane (its peak intensity) for only two dots (12 hours), so why do you say it maintained its peak intensity for a day, which implies at 24 hours?
The rainfall information should probably be mentioned first, because that is how the flooding was caused. Though I would first reword that sentence with the peak rainfall total from "The maximum rainfall totals were recorded in Costa Azul and Acapulco, where it caused over 24.73 in (628 mm) of rainfall." to "Heavy rainfall occurred in southwestern Mexico, especially in Costa Azul and Acapulco, where precipitation peaked at 24.73 in (628 mm)."
I see the recent copyedit made. However, there are still many problems with this article, and it some cases, I don't even know where to begin. Despite that extensive review I gave it, I am still unsatisfied with the article. If I were you, I would check a recently passed GA just to give you an idea of what a GA really looks like; you should especially learn how to write a better lead. So you wanna know my decision for this article? Fail. Sorry, but I am no longer rubber-stamping the articles you nominate for GA (in contrast to last year) that are either of poor quality or little is done to fix the problems. No offense YE, but when I first looked at this article, it looked like it would be generous calling the article C-class, IMO. Sorry, but as I had earlier, I am going to fail this article.--
12george1 (
talk)
03:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)reply
First and foremost, you need to get the status on the hundreds of missing people. If true, that could make Odile one of the deadliest Pacific hurricanes ever. Surely such a high death total would be mentioned in some newspapers, even if it was the 40. However,
this is the only one in a Google news search for [Mexico deaths] in September and October of 1984, so something doesn't seem right. Where does the source that gives the 40 deaths get its info from?
This list of Mexican disasters only lists the
San Juanico Disaster as occurring in 1984, no mention of Odile. I do see a few sources when looking up "mexico muertos 1984 huracan" that brings up the exact same wording for "Odilia" in 1984 that caused 40 deaths and hundreds of people missing, but none of them go into any further detail. So, I'm a little skeptical about that total.
But I pointed out a source from the United Nations that included much less deadly storms. I just find it quite odd that there is no mention for those 40 deaths other than that one source. Can you provide an additional source that verifies the 40 deaths that does not have that exact same wording? And furthermore, you should find out about the hundreds of missing people. It was 28 years ago! I don't know what you mean by "This is Mexico, after all." Aside from being slightly racist, the country is well-developed and would likely have some record of a hurricane killing hundreds of people in the 1980s. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
Also, the source was published in 2007, while the the UN source could be older? Mexican storms tend to have tons of missing ppl in them, Cristina 96 and Kiko 07 are good examples of this.
YEPacificHurricane16:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)reply
"and was downgraded to a tropical storm shortly before landfall, which was northwest of Zihuatanejo" - cut down the last portion to "shortly before landfall at Zihuatanejo".
"The depression began to curve more towards the northwest of a narrow ridge located over southern Mexico" - I don't see how that's possible, considering the storm was offshore Mexico. How could it be northwest of a ridge over Mexico?
"the depression was upgraded to Tropical Storm Odile" - who did this?
"the EPHC reported that Odile had attained hurricane status while turning towards the east" - based on what for the intensity? And why did it turn east?
"Late on September 21, Hurricane Odile reached its peak intensity of 105 mph (165 km/h) (a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale) as it approached Acapulco." - how was that intensity ascertained?
"While maintaining peak intensity for a half of a day, the cyclone began to turn more northwestward in response to the weakening of the ridge." - you just said it was because of the trough that it turned to the northwest. Which one was it?
Now there seems to be a bit of a redundancy. You say that the trough caused the storm to turn to the west-northwest, and that the weakening ridge turned it to the northwest. That seems to be just one event. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk) 21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)--♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
"the cloud pattern of Odile moved northwest, passing east of Manzanillo before weakening as it re-curved towards Texas" - how can the cloud pattern weaken if the storm was no longer a tropical cyclone?
But how? I understand if the cloud pattern becomes disorganized, but weakens implies intensity, which implies a circulation, but if it wasn't a TC, I don't see how it can weaken after it was no longer a TC. --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
"According to press reports in Mexico City, officials warned that illness may occur due to overflowed sewers and a lack of drinking water." - how is this related to Odile for what happened in Mexico City?
"Due to flooding from a combination of storms before Odile, over 40,000 people evacuated their homes due to flooding in Acapulco." - can you avoid saying "due to flooding" twice in the same sentence?
"In addition, 11 people died when they were washed away in their homes." - was this due to Odile? The newspaper said "washed away during storms before Odile hit"
" In all, Odile brought the heaviest rains to the region since 1978." - the newspaper said that the rains before Odile were the heaviest, not the storm itself.
"Due to heavy rainfall, the ongoing floods in Mexico continued. Acapulco Mayor Alfonso Arugdin Alcaraz reported that flooding damaged roughly 900 homes, inundated 30 miles (50 km) of highways, triggered an evacuation of 7,000 people, and left 20,000 families without water service." - none of this is cited by ref 4
"In Mexico City, flooding streets brought traffic jams. Many homes were on the brink of collapse, though damage through the city was considered relatively minor. About 80% of the crops in the state of Guerrero were damaged." - I don't think any of this was due to Odile. For Mexico City, the article said Odile's rain was minimal, but there was "unusually heavy rainfall this season", so it's not clear if the traffic jams were from the hurricane. Ditto with the homes on collapse - that wasn't Odile. And the crops in Guerrero is similarly unclear, but the context implies it was due to preceding rainfall.
The evacuations in Acapulco should be removed, as that was caused by the previous storms. Notice how it says "flooding had forced the evacuations...", right after a paragraph saying "damaged an already battered area". --♫
Hurricanehink (
talk)
21:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Hurricane Odile (1984). 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).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.