Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Fred (2015)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 22:06, 14 October 2017 [1].

Hurricane Fred (2015)

edit
Nominator(s): Auree ★★ 18:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although not as intense nor destructive as recent Hurricanes Irma and Maria, Hurricane Fred of 2015 was still a notable tropical cyclone for several reasons. Not only was its formation near the coast of West Africa, which endured heavy storm surge activity, one of the easternmost points for tropical cyclogenesis in the tropical Atlantic, but it also became the easternmost cyclone in the basin to attain hurricane status. Moreover, it was the first hurricane since 1892—and only the second ever—to move directly through the island nation of Cape Verde. Luckily, its effects there were limited to sporadic structural and crop damage, and offset by its beneficial drought-alleviating rainfall. I hope you all enjoy the article! Auree ★★ 18:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image review:
It's been a while since I've dabbled on Wiki: Which license does that image fall under? Auree ★★ 17:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Same as File:Whole world - land and oceans.jpg, I'd say, for the background. I am not sure what copyright status the output of the track map generator has, I am guessing that @Titoxd: knows? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:41, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The track generator output is based from public domain data, the recommended license is public domain, and the uploader of the file licensed his contribution as public domain, so the file is public domain. Titoxd(?!?) 00:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I added the license; see what you think. Auree ★★ 21:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see no ALT text anywhere, although it may be hidden in the two templates that are used to transclude some images. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:02, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Will address this asap. Thanks for the review! Auree ★★ 17:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I might be blind, but I don't see the requirement for ALT text in the FA criteria? It's been a while since my last FAC but I remember it not being a prerequisite. Auree ★★ 21:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You aren't blind. I just point out the presence and quality of ALT text as a matter of course when reviewing. ALT text isn't mandatory, if people want to add it they can if they don't want they don't have to. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:53, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying that, Jo-Jo Auree ★★ 12:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. Well done. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 22:21, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dank! Good to see you're still around :) Auree ★★ 01:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You too! - Dank (push to talk) 03:41, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although tropical cyclones in the extreme eastern Atlantic are typically propelled westward by high pressures from a subtropical ridge,[7]" you probably don't need the "high pressure" bit, since a "subtropical ridge" is by definition an area of high pressure. YE Pacific Hurricane 05:51, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added it because I talk about ridges and high pressure quite often, as that was an important feature in steering Fred's path. Most laymen don't know what a ridge is, so I usually mention that it is an area of high pressure in met histories. Auree ★★ 10:21, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, YE! Thanks for bringing up these technical and accessibility points that I would have normally overlooked. I implemented/commented on your suggestions, except for the source/note for currency conversion. Could you clarify what you mean by note? Auree ★★ 10:21, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As for the note for the currency conversion, something like Typhoon Nabi#Notes the second note on that section is an example. YE Pacific Hurricane 16:31, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added! Found a website that has conversion rates for previous years, including 2015. Do you have any more comments? Auree ★★ 19:58, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Any reason inches are spelled out in this line: "On the island of Santiago, the most significant impact was due to heavy rainfall peaking at 6.3 inches (160 mm).[46]" You don't spell out feet on its first useage. YE Pacific Hurricane 13:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good point; I spelled out the first occasions of miles and feet. Auree ★★ 19:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose Comments by Finetooth

edit
This reads well. I have a few suggestions and questions, as follows:
General
  • Even if not required, alt text for the images would be nice for people who can't see the images. Just briefly describe the essence of the image; e.g., "Map showing the track of the hurricane".
Lead
  • ¶2 "though the rain's overall impact on the agriculture" – Delete "the"?
Yes. Finetooth (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • ¶2 "submerging large swaths of residential area" – Should this be plural "areas"?
West Africa
  • ¶1 "Along the shores of Dakar..." – Link Dakar here rather than in the next section?
  • ¶1 "Victims in the affected region received more than 100 tons (220,000 lbs) of rice and 12 million CFA francs (US$20,000) in relief funds." – Where did the relief funds come from?
Cape Verde
  • ¶1 "were halted soon after squally conditions spread across the islands" – Trim to "were halted soon after squalls spread across the islands"?
  • ¶2 "Two inhabitants were taken to hospital when their home partially collapsed." – I'd leave out "but both remained in stable conditions" since we don't know what happened to them later, and we don't know the extent of their injuries.
  • ¶2 I would consider unlinking Praia, Sal, and Santo Antão in this section since they are already linked earlier in the main text of a short article.
  • ¶3 "Efforts to restore the pier were yet to be completed by May 2017, about 2.5 years after the hurricane, resulting in public protest and exacerbating the island's precarious economy." – I'd trim this a bit, and I don't think you can exacerbate an economy. Suggestion: "Pier restoration was incomplete as of May 2017, about 2.5 years after the hurricane. The delay led to public protest and weakened the island's precarious economy." Or something like that.
  • ¶4 Unlink São Nicolau since it's already linked earlier in the main text?
All good. If a sudden rush of empathy leads you to add alt text later, the angels will sing. Switching to support on prose, as noted above. Finetooth (talk) 16:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The angels have sung—and inspired me to give it a go. :) Auree ★★ 20:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review

edit

With so many foreign language sources, mainly Portuguese, my checks have been limited to format, presentation and link checking.

  • Refs 3 and 7 appear to be to the same source. In each case, how does this source support the statement cited to it? If navigation of the source is required, there should be notes to that effect
  • Ref 8: I think the publisher is Atalantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory, of which the Hurricane Research Division is a component.
  • Ref 25: The link goes to Discussion no. 30, not 31
  • Ref 30: Check publisher (who does not appear to be Le Soleil)
  • Refs 42, 49 and 54: I could not get the links to work – please check them.

Otherewise the sources look to be in good order. Brianboulton (talk) 18:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks kindly for the review! Auree ★★ 19:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional sources review

edit

Hi there. I've never participated in any FAC, but the user above mentioned his difficulty in doing a source check for the sources in Portuguese so I thought I could help with those. I'm only checking if the information in the article is supported by the sources in Portuguese, I don't know a thing about hurricanes. Feel free to tell me if I'm doing something I shouldn't here in FAC. RetiredDuke (talk) 17:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 37 - I can't read the source article, it only shows a bunch of headlines. At least for me.
  • I am so sorry, that link is working perfectly fine. I was talking about ref 31, the Bissau Digital one, that opens weirdly to me. That was the reason I started this, I couldn't get the very top link to work. Bungled the ref number, though. RetiredDuke (talk) 09:43, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 38 c - "a sport center at a gymnasium" - that wording threw me off for a second, I had to check the text twice since there's no tradition of the word "gymnasium" or equivalent in the Portuguese language to mean a type of school like there is in the Germanic languages. The source refers to "cobertura do pavilhão desportivo do Liceu Olavo Moniz". "Liceu" is an old word for "high school", there's no other connotation for it anymore other than the indication that the institution was founded way back. So it was a high school gym/sports facility, I don't know which one is better for the English language.
  • Ref 39 b - Is that a typo? The source refers to 26 million in losses, not 76 million. Also, I don't believe your wording is correct. That is a press release from the Boavista City Hall, where they say they estimate they will need to spend 26 million in reparations. Then, outside of general repairs and the ones that fall under the responsability of the City Hall, they estimate another 50 million losses in the private sector.

I will continue in a bit. RetiredDuke (talk) 17:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 42 - Link is dead. May I suggest this alternative for both claims a and b? I know it's not from Cape Verde, but it's a reliable newspaper in Portugal. It supports both claims.
  • Ref 43 - There's nothing in the source that supports the claim of "public protest". Must have been a mistranslation because the source consists of bureaucrats and touristic operators expressing their concern about the delay in reparations. RetiredDuke (talk) 18:14, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Protest might indeed be too strong of a wording; changed to "concerns". 23:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Ref 44 - This whole article is about the excessive sand extraction in the island of Sal. The only reference to the hurricane is to say that the situation worsened in the pier area after Fred. Concern is once again expressed, but there's no public protest.
  • Ref 46 - This can also be used to support 42 b, if you prefer a local news source to my previous suggestion.
  • Ref 47 a - "prompting residents from adjacent areas to evacuate" - the source does not support this claim.
  • It's been a while since I worked on the article but I remember reading something about evacuations, probably in another article. Nonetheless, I cannot retrieve the information right now so it has been altered. Auree ★★ 23:50, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 49 - Link is dead.
  • Ref 58 - "and a few people suffered minor injuries when a tree fell on their car" - there was only one person inside the car.

RetiredDuke (talk) 19:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I finished the review of all the sources in Portuguese. All references I've not mentioned are good to go. RetiredDuke (talk) 20:08, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thorough check of the sources! It gives me more assurance to know the source contents and their transduction into the article have been checked by another pair of capable eyes. Auree ★★ 23:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Brianboulton: & @RetiredDuke: I have found replacements/archived pages for the remaining problematic sources. With that, everything should be up to standard. Thanks again for your diligence, RetiredDuke! Auree ★★ 18:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All my concerns have been adressed by now. I also went back and re-read the article in its entirety so I could throw my 2 cents and I found it to be very well-written and easy to follow. I found nothing to quibble about so I support this nomination. RetiredDuke (talk) 09:20, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gratitude for your spot-checks of the Portuguese sources, and of course the support. Hopefully this encounter compels you to visit FAC again in the future, perhaps for more Portuguese-related topics :) Auree ★★ 09:28, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Hurricane_Fred_(2015)/archive1&oldid=1143358479"