 | A fact from Hurricane Bud (2012) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 June 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Article
editIsn't this a little premature? The storm is falling apart as I type this, and it hasn't done anything yet. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hardly. If anything, this article should have been created a while ago. This storm is currently affecting land, and there is a near 100% chance of impact on land. This storm has received a significant amount of attention, and a lot of shelters have been opened. YE Pacific Hurricane 21:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- But why not just include the info in the main article until it's too long to handle? Even as of now, this article is very un-developed, and the section in the main article can more than handle what's here. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, a lot more can be added. Under your logic, Hurricane Liza (1976) and Hurricane Tina (1992) would be merged since that article is under-developed. I am pretty sure WPTC is beyond that step, an article should be evaluated on how much potential information there is IMO. In all, I don't see any need to merge. YE Pacific Hurricane 22:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, Liza and Tina are historical. This is an active storm that is under-developed, so why should the article be split off from the main article? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:04, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Because the storm is notable (or will almost certainly be notable). YE Pacific Hurricane 22:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, but that's just crystal ball then, which is no reason to make or keep an article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- If I recall correctly, we can do it for almost certain events (i.e the storm being notable). YE Pacific Hurricane
- But I don't think this is certain. I don't want this to stay like Hurricane Beatriz (2011), which was a poor article for several months. Invest 94L is more notable than Bud right now. At least that one caused flooding and there are 2 missing people. Bud might not do anything. I proposed it get redirected to the main article and merge any remaining content, given the current state of the article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- How is it not almost certain? While the storm is weakening, the odds of the storms doing nothing is less than 1%. I'd consider that almost certain. Also, I'd like someone to contact 12george1 (talk · contribs) if he plans on finishing it. There is currenty a tag saying it's under construction. If he does not reply by tomorrow or says no, I will. YE Pacific Hurricane 22:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- I meant not do anything significant. You can feel free to edit the article, he's not editing now. But unless there are some deaths and some notability, there's no reason for the article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:50, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- I have changed my mind, we should probably merge this. Initially, I created this article in light of Bud threatening Mexico and significant impact seemed inevitable. The only other thing I can find for impact is this, which states that there was sustained winds of 41 mph and gusts to 55 mph in Manzanillo. So while the storm did do something, it was almost nothing.--12george1 (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Wait till to tomorrow to see if there is any more impact. Either way, the storm is still the earliest Major hurricane east pf 140W. another argument for its notability was it's very rapid weakening. YE Pacific Hurricane 16:26, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- I have changed my mind, we should probably merge this. Initially, I created this article in light of Bud threatening Mexico and significant impact seemed inevitable. The only other thing I can find for impact is this, which states that there was sustained winds of 41 mph and gusts to 55 mph in Manzanillo. So while the storm did do something, it was almost nothing.--12george1 (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- I meant not do anything significant. You can feel free to edit the article, he's not editing now. But unless there are some deaths and some notability, there's no reason for the article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:50, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- How is it not almost certain? While the storm is weakening, the odds of the storms doing nothing is less than 1%. I'd consider that almost certain. Also, I'd like someone to contact 12george1 (talk · contribs) if he plans on finishing it. There is currenty a tag saying it's under construction. If he does not reply by tomorrow or says no, I will. YE Pacific Hurricane 22:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- But I don't think this is certain. I don't want this to stay like Hurricane Beatriz (2011), which was a poor article for several months. Invest 94L is more notable than Bud right now. At least that one caused flooding and there are 2 missing people. Bud might not do anything. I proposed it get redirected to the main article and merge any remaining content, given the current state of the article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- If I recall correctly, we can do it for almost certain events (i.e the storm being notable). YE Pacific Hurricane
- Ah, but that's just crystal ball then, which is no reason to make or keep an article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Because the storm is notable (or will almost certainly be notable). YE Pacific Hurricane 22:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, Liza and Tina are historical. This is an active storm that is under-developed, so why should the article be split off from the main article? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:04, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, a lot more can be added. Under your logic, Hurricane Liza (1976) and Hurricane Tina (1992) would be merged since that article is under-developed. I am pretty sure WPTC is beyond that step, an article should be evaluated on how much potential information there is IMO. In all, I don't see any need to merge. YE Pacific Hurricane 22:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
- But why not just include the info in the main article until it's too long to handle? Even as of now, this article is very un-developed, and the section in the main article can more than handle what's here. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
<-- Agreed on waiting til tomorrow. I just don't want this to fall by the wayside. BTW, is there a source for that bit about earliest MH east of 140W? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:20, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, one factor in favor of keeping this article is that there are a variety of sources. Some articles don't have as much variety of sources as Bud's. YE Pacific Hurricane 02:37, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Trivia
editI'm sorry but I don't think some of this is trivial. How is forecasting rainfall totals and orange alerts trivial? IMO there are not. They give the reader an idea on how much impact from this storm was expected. YE Pacific Hurricane 01:59, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- We don't usually include rainfall forecast totals. There is no need for them. What is an orange alert? If it's just people being prepared, well, that's trivial. We know people are prepared. The article should show how the hurricane significantly impacted the public. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- AFAIK, I explained what an orange alert, it means that a disaster is imminent. They are kinda similar to watches/warnings. Also, does anyone else have any thoughts on these two sections? Right now it is us two talking back and fourth. YE Pacific Hurricane 02:08, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- A disaster is imminent? You don't need an orange alert to say that, and it isn't information. It sounds like it's straight out of a news article. It doesn't change anything or anyone. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:24, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- AFAIK, I explained what an orange alert, it means that a disaster is imminent. They are kinda similar to watches/warnings. Also, does anyone else have any thoughts on these two sections? Right now it is us two talking back and fourth. YE Pacific Hurricane 02:08, 26 May 2012 (UTC)