Talk:Hurricane Ginger

Dates

Once again, the author of this article left out the days of the existence of the hurricane. What is the author thinking to leave out the days of existence????

Todo

Better intro ("subtropical wanderer"? Did someone just make that up? If not it needs a source), more notable information in the body of the article. And...why does this storm deserve an article again? Jdorje 01:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't lose any hair if this article was redirected. It is here as a long lasting storm, and because it is not the longest but the second longest, I say merge it. Hurricanehink 04:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Whoa whoa whoa, time out! This storm is AT LEAST the second longest-lasting storm to form in the Atlantic. It is very notable. I am pretty firmly against the merge. -- §Hurricane ERIC§ archive -- my dropsonde 23:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I mainly put that there so someone would prove me wrong and add some more information. It could stay, but could use some more in-depth trivia. Hurricanehink 00:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Trivia does not make an article. We need impact to make an article. Unless the impact section can be extended beyond "there were no reported deaths", this article isn't deserving of a separate article; it can happily get by with its own little section on List of notable Atlantic hurricanes. By comparison, articles such as Subtropical Storm One (1978), which is even more notable from a meteorological perspective, have been denied an article. Why should this one (and Faith) get a special status? Jdorje 00:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

These were much stronger storms, lasted longer, and broke multiple rules. They were also both very tropical. 1978 was a lowly 45kt subtropical storm that lasted only a few days and just happened to form at a very unusual time of the year. There's also more infomation to give about both Ginger and Faith and both had significant land effects. The 1978 storm had none whatsoever. These combine to make both Faith and Ginger more notable than the two. Of the two, I feel more strongly about keeping Ginger in it's own article, even though I think both deserve it. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 22:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Importance

Is this really low importance? The storm was, for a long period, thought to be the longest Atlantic hurricane in history, and is currently second. I think more like mid. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Low Impact = Low importance. See my response on Linda (1997), same logic.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

See my response on Linda (1997), same logic :) Hurricanehink (talk) 13:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Rainfallwise, it might need to be raised to mid-importance. Not that many storms drop over 15" of rain on North Carolina. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Juliancolton (talk) 21:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Juliancolton (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice job with this article. I was pleasantly surprised at how much info is available on the storm, but I have a few comments.

• I think the article needs some clarification with regard to the longevity record. The lead says "Ginger spent 27.25 days as a tropical cyclone", which rounds to 27 days, but the "Record longevity" says Ginger persisted for "a total of 28 days." Also, the claim that the San Ciriaco hurricane lasted longer is a bit dubious, as it also spent 28 days as a tropical cyclone. At least one authoritative source – including the book "Hurricanes and the Mid Atlantic States" by Rick Schwartz – says Ginger and the San Ciriaco hurricane are tied for the longest-lived.
  • The issue is whether "days" refers to a 24 hour period, or a calendar day. I changed the one in the "record longevity" so it's clear that it refers to 24 hour period. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• The anticyclone bit is very confusing and suspicious, and I can't find where in the MWR article you're looking. Which section is the relevant info in?
  • It's at the top of the page, third paragraph. "The establishment of this band of cloudiness...anticyclonic eddy... South America." --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "For about six days, Ginger remained at minimal hurricane status." - I think "maintained" instead of "remained at" would be less clunky.
  • Good call. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• By September 28, Ginger was moving northwestward toward North Carolina and was steadily intensifying. - Awkward sentence structure. Any way to reword it?
  • How is it an awkward sentence structure? There is parallelism between Ginger and "was moving" and "was steadily intensifying". --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• What does "east-southward" mean?
  • I wish Firefox would've caught that :( --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• I'm not sure why a separate subsection is needed for five sentences.
  • Expanded a bit. It's to emphasize the record, which I didn't feel the need to establish in the body of the MH. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• Fern and Heidi are linked twice in the body of the article.
  • Faw. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• The first paragraph of the impact section uses the phrase "the island" in four consecutive sentences. Can you try to avoid some of that repetition?
  • Yea, I'll try. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "prompting small craft warnings" - This needs an action after "prompting", like "the issuance" or "the hoisting".
  • Okerydoke. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "Before it struck North Carolina, the American Red Cross set up 28 emergency shelters" - the Red Cross didn't strike NC.
  • Faw. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "with gale warnings northward to Rehoboth Beach, Delaware." - Seems kind of weird without "extending" or somesuch before "northward".
  • Mokay. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "with up to 7 ft (2.1 m) in the Pamlico Sound." - This is also cumbersome wording.
  • Better? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "The total made Ginger" - Weird wording.
  • Combined with previous sentence. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• "In Atlantic Beach, North Carolina, wind gusts reached 92 mph (148 km/h), which were the highest winds associated with Ginger in the United States." - Some redundancies; I would suggest simply "wind gusts reached[...], the highest in association with Ginger".
  • Kk. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
• I think the rainfall map should be bigger, since it's really hard to read at its current size.
  • Yea, I was thinking that too. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

On-hold, etc. Juliancolton (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thx for the review. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane Ginger. 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/20080923015222/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1971.pdf to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1971.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080923015222/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1971.pdf to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/1971.pdf

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) 22:59, 6 April 2017 (UTC)