Talk:Hurricane Emilia (1994)

GA review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Good enough to pass, but see if you can find a better first sentence

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

In all, it's a very good article, and thus, it passes GA. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 21:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

HURDAT

Hurricane Emilia attained Category 5 intensity on July 19, 1994. The previous Category 5 Pacific hurricane, Ava, lost that intensity on June 7, 1973. That is a difference of 7,712 days. The next Category 5 Pacific hurricane, Gilma, attained that intensity on July 24, 1994, four days after Emilia lost it. Emilia hence ended the longest, and began the shortest, spans of time between successive Category 5 Pacific hurricanes. Emilia was briefly the most intense tropical cyclone on record in the central north Pacific, with a lowest pressure of 926 mbar (hPa). Emilia remains the third most-intense in the central north Pacific, after Gilma and Ioke attained deeper pressures.

Here is what I removed from the article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:01, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article

I know I'm a new user and too young for this (Im only 13), but I'm Going to Try and improve this Article to featured status. BlueTropicalWave (Talk) 17:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Good luck with that. :P —CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 18:35, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

This article needs quite a bit of work, they are plenty of better FAC choices out there than this. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 19:22, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Is This the code for the inline citation: <ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sDxSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2jYNAAAAIBAJ&pg=6734,2015949&dq=hurricane+emilia&hl=en|title=Hurricane Emilia skirts Hawaiian Islands|author=Associated Press|newspaper=The Post and Courier|date=1994-07-22|accessdate=2013-07-09}}</ref>

Close. Put Associated Press as agency, not as author. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

You did not listen to us. I had to tweak the ref you added to meet the thingy Hink suggested. Also, watch out for redundancies, it is very easy to go overboard in all EPAC articles, especially for storms like Emilia. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 22:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry.i was rushing so I didn't do that because I had to get off the computer. BlueTropicalWave (Talk) 23:39, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have to ask what redundancy is? BlueTropicalWave (Talk) 23:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Look it up. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane}

Also, please do not add stuff like this that happens in every storm. However, I will say that this was a good edit. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:09, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Can i put staff writter as an auther? BlueTropicalWave (Talk) 01:30, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Why would you do that? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

No.YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 01:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)