Talk:Hurricane Marie (2014)

Todo

I started reviewing the article for GA, but I forgot I had written portions of the MH. So here are my comments:

• Since Marie is in the past, should the first sentence be in the past tense, or because it still is, is the present tense OK?
• "with the depression acquiring tropical storm-force winds within six hours of formation" - avoid the "with" and "within" in the same sentence. Pick one or the other
• Link to SSHS when you first mention " Category 1 hurricane" in the lede
• Given that the TCR hasn't come out yet, be sure you'll update the genesis and dissipation stages, but for now it's stable
• You should add USD somewhere in the lede
• While the use of sources is great to cover the Atlantic portion, I think it goes into too much detail what the wave did. The wave is only minimally related to Marie, so I think this sentence can be cut: "Embedded within an elongated trough,[4] the weak system struggled to organize and convection soon diminished."
• Ref 8 doesn't mention the SAL

♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Pre-FAC review

• Is there an image for the infobox that has the storm centered?
• "Some organization... prevented organization" - both are in the same sentence. Might wanna wake it clearer and use a different word
• "with the depression... within six hours" - don't have two "with" constructions in the same sentence
• Link wind shear in the lead?
• In the second lead paragraph, the first two sentence start with "On August [X]" - try changing it up
• Maybe mention the size in the lead, since you refer to the large size a few times. You should also mention it was southwest of Mexico. That country isn't mentioned until the 3rd paragraph
• "Over the next several days, Marie progressively degraded to below hurricane strength as it moved into an increasingly hostile environment with cooler waters and a more stable atmosphere." - bit long without any additional punctuation.
• You say 6th most intense by pressure in the lead and in the template, but the prose says 4th place. Pick one or the other. Either emphasize since the start of reliable records in 1988, or say on record in general
• in the last sentence of the Mexican impact, don't say "In light". Bad taste
• link Palos Verde Peninsula?
• "Along the 18,500 ft (5,600 m) long breakwater, 1,550 ft (470 m) of sustained major damage, 850 ft (260 m) saw significant damage, and a further 1,725 ft (526 m) experienced moderate damage." - the "1,550 ft (470 m) of sustained..." bit doesn't make too much sense. Missing word?
• Any more info about the damage at the Port of Long Beach? What facilities were damaged there?

Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Marie (2014)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 12george1 (talk · contribs) 05:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello CB! I notice that you've had this thing up at Wikipedia:Good article nominations since September 7! Anyway, I'm gonna review this article right now. Here are my issues with passing the article:

• Did you fix/address Hurricanehink's concerns on the talk page?
• "barometric pressure of 918 mbar (hPa; 27.11 inHg) in August 2014." - Wikilink "August 2014" to 2014 Pacific hurricane season?
• "The remnant cyclone was last noted by the NHC on September 2 as it crossed" - NHC? What's that? :P
• "the Saharan Air Layer created an hostile area for storm organization" - a hostile area?
• "NHC issued the final advisory on Marie at 0900 UTC on August 29" - Add a colon in the time
• "Minor flooding also occurred in near Acapulco and in Colima.[38][39]" ---> "Minor flooding also occurred near Acapulco and in Colima.[38][39]"
• On Reference #1 and #7, I think "MT" stands for Mike Tichacek
• Add "|language=es" to Reference #36

All in all, it's a decent article. Fix/address these issues and I will pass this article and list it as a Good Article.--12george1 (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

CB doesn't seem to have returned to the article. Should it be failed or should we find another TC editor to make the fixes, since there doesn't seem to be much? Wizardman 15:30, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry this took me forever to get back to, but I'm finally done with updating and making corrections. I've added some new content so it may be worth giving the article another skim through for any additions concerns. Thanks for the review, George! Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oops. I didn't know until a few days ago that you were waiting for the TCR to be released. Anyway, now that I see that it has been added and the information within it has as well, I am going to pass this article.--12george1 (talk) 17:19, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Losses

From the infobox "$20 million (2014 USD)"

Lead "...A breakwater near Long Beach sustained $10 million worth of damage... overall losses reached $20 million."

Body "...The Army Corps estimated that it would take more than $20 million to repair just the major breaches along the middle breakwater..."

And "...for areas around Navy Mole...$4 million"

Further "Damage across Catalina Island was estimated to be $3–5 million."

Yet "Total losses in California amounted to nearly $20 million."

We can, perhaps, explain some of the difference using the references given "On Sept. 18, the Corps awarded a $5 million contract to Connolly-Pacific Co., of Long Beach, Calif., to repair the 12 most severely damaged sections of the three breakwaters damaged by heavy seas from Hurricane Marie in late August." (I'll insert the $5m figure in the article.) So the $10m/20m for the breakwater(s) was perhaps an overestimate, but the damage in Mexico seems to have cost nothing to repair, according to these figures.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC).

I don't think it's inconsistent. The breakwater had $10 million in damage, $4 million to Navy Mole, and $3-5 million at Catalina Island. The repairs aren't part of the damage total, so the "nearly $20 million" is correct. I believe so, at least. @Cyclonebiskit: might want to verify though. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hurricane Marie (2014). 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/20121113000158/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/F1.html to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/F1.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.malibutimes.com/news/article_50cc2c42-2d57-11e4-9789-0019bb2963f4.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gazettes.com/news/army-corps-works-to-solve-breakwater-breaches-after-storm-surge/article_99922b48-3527-11e4-9e5c-001a4bcf887a.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) 23:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 24 April 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 21:56, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

---

Hurricane Marie (2014) → Hurricane Marie – Prominent than any other Maries. Then it's primary topic. --SMB99thx XD (contribs) 10:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose no benefit to readers in removing the year of a recurring name event, and not the only Hurricane Marie. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:37, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • There are more Hurricane Maries than just this one i admit! And, reason why i want to change it (even it would not benefit it) because it was a very prominent hurricane (much more damaging or much more intense, causing the popularity of that storm) and beats any other hurricanes with this name, causing this hurricane to be stand out from other hurricanes with this name. --SMB99thx XD (contribs) 13:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Nice storm to track, but I'm gonna have to oppose as well. The gap between this storm and the other Marie's isn't significant enough to warrant removal of the year. The storm wasn't retired, or by far and away the most notable version of Marie which is WPTC interpretation of WP:PRIMARY, as Marie 84 had similar land impacts to this one. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 15:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hurricane Marie (2014). 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/20140903092801/http://www.notisistema.com/noticias/marie-causa-la-muerte-de-dos-personas-en-la-costalegre-de-jalisco/ to http://www.notisistema.com/noticias/marie-causa-la-muerte-de-dos-personas-en-la-costalegre-de-jalisco/

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) 23:29, 22 May 2017 (UTC)