Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of storms in the 2003 Atlantic hurricane season
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted 05:32, 13 January 2008.
I published this a few weeks ago, following the format of featured List of storms in the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, and I believe it passes all of the FL criteria. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The numbers are inconsistent. I see "four" and "$50 million" in the same sentence. Other than that, it looks good. Juliancolton (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please read the MOS, as this follows how numbers 0-9 should be spelled out, while 10+ should just be the numbers. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, the intro appears to be completely unsourced, which is a shame when the rest is so well sourced. Also, any particular reason for having the ACE Ranking as a separate small table at the bottom instead of listed with each hurricane entry? Collectonian (talk) 01:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The lede is just a summary of the article, so sources there are not needed. Also, the reason for the ACE Ranking being separate is because that is the table used for all other hurricane season articles; as the 2003 season article is different from most others, the table was put in this article. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Normally, that is true on the lead, but for lists, the lead also must provide context for the list which includes information not summed up by the list, such as the dates of the hurricane series. The Wikipedia guidelines on leads do not say no citations, only no need for redundant sourcing. Stuff that is not specifically repeated with a source in the list should be sourced. Collectonian (talk) 02:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, ok. I got them. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Cool. Support :) Collectonian (talk) 05:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, ok. I got them. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Normally, that is true on the lead, but for lists, the lead also must provide context for the list which includes information not summed up by the list, such as the dates of the hurricane series. The Wikipedia guidelines on leads do not say no citations, only no need for redundant sourcing. Stuff that is not specifically repeated with a source in the list should be sourced. Collectonian (talk) 02:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The lede is just a summary of the article, so sources there are not needed. Also, the reason for the ACE Ranking being separate is because that is the table used for all other hurricane season articles; as the 2003 season article is different from most others, the table was put in this article. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
CommentThe links from "The Royal Gazette" don't work. Maybe it's temporary, but still... --Crzycheetah 08:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Thanks, I updated the links. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I love this kind of lists where each item is explained in one pragraph. Well done!--Crzycheetah 21:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, I updated the links. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very well done, great illustrations, meets all the criteria!
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 19:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.