This list is a current
featured list candidate. A featured list should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to
meet several criteria. Please feel free to After the list has been promoted or archived, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{ Article history}} template when the FLC closes. |
Timeline of the 2002 Pacific hurricane season is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 20, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
2002 Pacific hurricane season and the
1994 Pacific hurricane season are currently tied for the number of
Category 5 hurricanes in the same season with three each? |
This article was nominated for deletion on 6 January 2012. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Draft:Timeline of the 2002 Pacific hurricane season was copied or moved into Timeline of the 2002 Pacific hurricane season. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Jason Rees ( talk) 21:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
fixed most of them, will do the FLC fixes, but what are they ? -- Yue of the North 21:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
# Dont link evrey PST
I think thats it Jason Rees ( talk) 21:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I see some pretty basic problems, which means the article needs a copyedit.
♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk) 22:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I added the {{ primarysources}} tag because this article needs to cite something other than the hurricane-monitering agencies (National Hurricane Center, etc.). If this was truly such an extraordinary hurricane season, surely there must be some third-party writing about the season? cmadler ( talk) 19:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I really don't see why it should be necessary to discuss this here, but in a measure of good faith, I'll attempt to get some consensus. TropicalAnalystwx13 wants to get this article up to FL status, which is great; however, he's doing it by erasing the whole timeline and then going back and adding information month-by-month without referencing it. Instead of doing this, which guts the article so that it's unsourced and missing chunks of time, he should be doing one of two things:
So are there any objections to keeping the current timeline intact and having TAW do this in a sandbox? Inks.LWC ( talk) 05:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Inks.LWC. There is no reason for the article to be incomplete. If TAWX wanted to work on this article, he should either go section by section, improving it and maintaining those references. Given how well-referenced it was before, it should've just been improved in the main article. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 16:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks like TAWX won't finish this, so, I am putting this up to be merged (though I don't necessarily agree with a merge). Y E Pacific Hurricane 17:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
This list is a current
featured list candidate. A featured list should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to
meet several criteria. Please feel free to After the list has been promoted or archived, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{ Article history}} template when the FLC closes. |
Timeline of the 2002 Pacific hurricane season is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 20, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
2002 Pacific hurricane season and the
1994 Pacific hurricane season are currently tied for the number of
Category 5 hurricanes in the same season with three each? |
This article was nominated for deletion on 6 January 2012. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Draft:Timeline of the 2002 Pacific hurricane season was copied or moved into Timeline of the 2002 Pacific hurricane season. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Jason Rees ( talk) 21:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
fixed most of them, will do the FLC fixes, but what are they ? -- Yue of the North 21:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
# Dont link evrey PST
I think thats it Jason Rees ( talk) 21:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I see some pretty basic problems, which means the article needs a copyedit.
♬♩ Hurricanehink ( talk) 22:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I added the {{ primarysources}} tag because this article needs to cite something other than the hurricane-monitering agencies (National Hurricane Center, etc.). If this was truly such an extraordinary hurricane season, surely there must be some third-party writing about the season? cmadler ( talk) 19:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I really don't see why it should be necessary to discuss this here, but in a measure of good faith, I'll attempt to get some consensus. TropicalAnalystwx13 wants to get this article up to FL status, which is great; however, he's doing it by erasing the whole timeline and then going back and adding information month-by-month without referencing it. Instead of doing this, which guts the article so that it's unsourced and missing chunks of time, he should be doing one of two things:
So are there any objections to keeping the current timeline intact and having TAW do this in a sandbox? Inks.LWC ( talk) 05:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Inks.LWC. There is no reason for the article to be incomplete. If TAWX wanted to work on this article, he should either go section by section, improving it and maintaining those references. Given how well-referenced it was before, it should've just been improved in the main article. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 16:22, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks like TAWX won't finish this, so, I am putting this up to be merged (though I don't necessarily agree with a merge). Y E Pacific Hurricane 17:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)