Talk:Hurricane Fifi–Orlene

Untitled

An image is needed to go in the infobox. Jdorje 01:19, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

This site has an image of Fifi, though is it PD? Hurricanehink (talk) 01:17, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The documents on that site say they're done by NOAA and they (the documents) also contain the Atlantic hurricane season pictures we found for earlier seasons like 1980, but for the most part, I'm as unsure as you. Jake52 My talk

Need sources

This article doesn't have a single source. I am not happy with including Fifi on the "costliest hurricanes" lists without any sources for it. Jdorje 22:33, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Todo

A source for the damages number. Jdorje 07:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm concerned with this number, as it conflicts with a newspaper article I saw today from 1974 that would imply it is 30-40% too low. Thegreatdr 17:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The rainfall graphic has been added. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Retirement

Just so you all know, retirement was not originally meant to be completely permanent for storm names. Any articles we have in the project that state so need to be revised. Thegreatdr 22:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Regeneration

I think you need some more info on this aspect of the hurricane, as I'm quite confused and left wondering what the arguments are for both sides of the "debate". –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Either way, it would be quite one-sided now. =) Thegreatdr (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Article review issue

I see three of the more active people in the project have significantly edited this article in the past couple years (I was the first one to add inline references). That's going to delay its article review, just so you all know, since none of us can be the primary reviewer. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Fifi/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   For starters (which is why I'm putting it here), the article should be titled Fifi-Orlene, not just Fifi. Only the CPHC had the doubt whether they were one storm. The NHC's official stance is that they were one storm, both in the prelim report], and in the FAQs (which, I should note, does not have Hattie, which had similar uncertainty). The first paragraph of the lede should also reflect that.
   Met. history is good. Watch out for some redundant wording (intensified is used in two consecutive sentences in the 2nd paragraph), but over all, it's not too bad. Speaking of the first two sentences of the 2nd paragraph, could you tidy that up somewhat? You mention its westward track twice, intensification twice, and you should avoid saying "while south of Jamaica". Just "south of Jamaica". For impact, you say winds up to 132 mph - is that a gust? If so, mention that.
   The impact is good (particularly Honduras). I suggest re-arranging the order. You have a nice chronology going, but then you throw in that the storm destroyed most of the country's banana crop. I'd save that for the last paragraph, which has a summary feel. The 4th paragraph in Honduras should be in the aftermath, given its nature. The last two sentences in Honduras should be combined, since they cover the same thing, just from different sources.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   The 3rd and 4th sentences of the first paragraph of the aftermath is just plain wrong. It implies that the naming lists in the 1970s were tweaked by adding male names, but in 1979 the naming list was completely new, so the reference to Frances doesn't work.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Repeating what I said above, it sort of avoids talking about Orlene, but NHC's stance is that they were one in the same. Also, more pressing, you don't have anything from the NHC storm wallets, which is a large cache of info. Have you checked through there to make sure you have everything important in the article? Some important met details are missing. What caused it to strengthen in the Caribbean (warm waters, low shear perhaps)? What caused it to take its west track, and for that matter, the southerly bump? You should mention more about Orlene's track. The last thing it said about the track was that Fifi moved westward and became Orlene, and then suddenly, Orlene was moving to the north-northeast.
   I'd love if there was more impact for Jamaica or Hispaniola, but I know the limitations for the time period. Maybe try a Google News search for the date prior to the flooding disaster in Honduras? Were there any deaths outside in Belize or Nicaragua (just checking)? You mention the rainfall in Campeche twice (in elsewhere in Central America). Pick one of them and remove the other. Also, the first sentence of the last paragraph of the "response and assistance" section is random and is a bit unfocused. $46,000 is nothing, compared to the millions from other places. I'd remove it. I am curious, though. How long until the economy of Honduras improved? Also, I'd merge that rebuilding paragraph with the other one, and avoid adding the sub-sections. If you find impact elsewhere (ideally Guatemala or Mexico), then the sub-sections would work, but it looks awkward with them now.

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:

   So, there are some things to be done. It really seems like Mexico is lacking. Most tropical cyclones that cross Mexico would cause some impact. You're missing from the prelim report that Acapulco had 11 inches of rainfall in 24 hours. That's pretty significant, surely some mudslides happened. I'll put it on hold so these comments can be addressed.

Nothing has been done, so I have to fail it. You should re-nominate it when these issues are addressed. It is good, but it's still lacking in places. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:58, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Journal Articles for Fifi

• USGS - "One in 25-year event"
• The Cooper Ornithological Society - Bird migration impacts
• Department of Sociology (Only Abstract)
• Unk. (Only Abstract)

Just some stuff for another day. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 13:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Title

Given that the article also includes Orlene, why is it only at "Hurricane Fifi"? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:29, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I forgot my reasoning before...but that doesn't matter anymore :P It should be Hurricane Fifi-Orlene. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:36, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Contradiction?

Paths of Hurricanes Fifi and Orlene

Map key

Saffir–Simpson scale

  Tropical depression (≤38 mph, ≤62 km/h)
  Tropical storm (39–73 mph, 63–118 km/h)
  Category 1 (74–95 mph, 119–153 km/h)
  Category 2 (96–110 mph, 154–177 km/h)
  Category 3 (111–129 mph, 178–208 km/h)
  Category 4 (130–156 mph, 209–251 km/h)
  Category 5 (≥157 mph, ≥252 km/h)
  Unknown

Storm type

Tropical cyclone

Subtropical cyclone

Extratropical cyclone, remnant low, tropical disturbance, or monsoon depression

The article says that once Fifi crossed central America and Mexico it reformed and was renamed Orlene. However the storm path image shows Hurricane Fifi-Orlene as two seperate systems, with Orlene forming and reaching tropical storm strength while Fifi was still over southern Mexico as a tropical depression.68.106.152.102 (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hurricane Fifi–Orlene. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090715133317/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tracks1949to2008_epa.txt to http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tracks1949to2008_epa.txt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hurricane Fifi–Orlene. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090228200227/http://ineter.gob.ni/Direcciones/meteorologia/Desastres/Huracanes/huracan_fifi.htm to http://www.ineter.gob.ni/Direcciones/meteorologia/Desastres/Huracanes/huracan_fifi.htm

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hurricane Fifi–Orlene. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717103126/http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/reports/mitch/mitch.html to http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/reports/mitch/mitch.html

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)