Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Kate (2003)/archive1

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 not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:39, 20 October 2008 [1].

Hurricane Kate (2003)

Nominator(s): Dylan620 (talk)

I'm nominating this article for featured because I have read it over, and was quite impressed. Also, since it's already A-class, this nomination might be the article's only step away from being featured. Kudos to Hurricanehink, the article's main contributor. Dy la n 6 20 Life story 22:57 UTC October 16, 2008

Comments Have you made an effort to contact User:Hurricanehink, the primary contributor to the article? In any event, here's your source check:
http://australiasevereweather.com/cyclones/2004/summ0309.txt (ref #13) is a deadlink.
Not a biggie, but ideally, "NHC" should be spelled out in each reference.
The authors listed for refs #6, #7, #9, #11, and #12 should be the publishers.
What makes http://www.surfline.com/newsletter/November03.html a reliable source?
Ref #13 needs publisher info (Australian Sever Weather).
Otherwise, sources look good.

–Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 22:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have made an effort to contact Hurricanehink, but due to his long wikibreak he will not be back until December. Dy la n 6 20 Life story 23:18 UTC October 16, 2008

Should you wait until he returns, then? While not official, he's told me via IRC that he would rather not nominate this article due to lack of notability. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, this should be at AfD then? Ben (talk) 23:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not by an means. Don't get me wrong, the article clearly meets notability requirements. Hurricanehink is rather picky with what he nominates at FAC, with a preference towards storms that make landfall. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say it would bother me greatly if this article is intentionally held back from FAC if it meets the featured article criteria. This article is part of a featured topic. If an article is notable enough to be included in a featured topic then it should, by definition, be notable enough to be a featured article as well. I should also point out that it was Hurricanehink who nominated the topic that this article is a part of in the first place. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, I didn't mean to open a can of worms. :-) Tropical Storm Erick (2007)'s recent FAC demonstrates that many are opposed to lesser-notable storms becoming featured. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 12:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I recall It dit did not passed do to article length not how not notable off a storm it is. Shortly thereafter, ACE went in there. now it is a mess. Dylan, if you one to nominte FA or FT articles.Hurricane Hernan (2008) could be a FA. I can make it a FAC because I created it. Cyclonebskit can also do it too. A good featured topic would be Hurricane Ioke,Tropical Storm Zeta (2005), Hurricane Fausto (2002),Hurricane Ekeka,Hurricane Faith (1966),1975 Pacific Northwest hurricane,Hurricane Vince (2005), or Hurricane Maria (2005). Leave Message orYellow Evan home 13:07, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest withdrawal per this. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:26, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Evan, you can't just have a FT for random articles, they have to me related! Also, Hernan is no where near FA, much less, A-class --Kirk76 ^{1854 Atlantic} ^{Hurricane Season} 19:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose withdrawal I think this should stay up. My reasoning is that despite Hurricanehink's request, it is one of relatively few comments this nomination has seen, and very few Wikipedians have posted their opinion about the nomination. D y l a n 6 2 0 Life story 23:10 UTC October 17, 2008

Comment I note that the nominator isn't a significant contributor, and that one of the main contributors seems to not wish this nominated. Ealdgyth - Talk 04:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Article is mainly written as an extended weather report. Does not have the coherence, structure, and flow of a professional encyclopaedia entry; thus it fails criterion 1a. Wording taken from #1 NOAA is too close to the source, in my opinion, for Featured status. Lazulilasher (talk) 22:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I Can see no reason why this cant be an FA - Though you need to source this bit "Due to the lack of effects from Hurricane Kate, the name was not retired, and is on the list of tropical cyclone names for the 2009 season" Jason Rees (talk) 02:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak object, it needs somebody to go through it with a fine comb, paying particular attention to the list of terms delineated as problematic in WP:WPTC/J. At this point, the article is almost on the borderline of failing B-Class criterion 6 / WikiProject criterion B6, so it falls a bit short of 1(a), I'm afraid. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - The Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject agreed to pass all of our articles though WP:WPTC/A so that we don't submit low-quality articles to FAC. You should be brought it there for A-class review first, where its many problems would have been pointed out. Also, you are pinching this from the main contributor, who will submit it when he feels it is ready. HurricaneHink knows how the FAC process works, and if he didn't submit this it was because he wasn't satisfied with it. We shouldn't be either. Plasticup ^T/C 23:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.