Talk:Hurricane Edith (1971)

Image

I found a good radar image, but it's a PDF. Is there some way I can upload PDFs?

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

I dunno, but here's one online after weakening from Cat. 5.

• http://www.freewebs.com/hurricanereplenishingproject/HRP%20EDITH%2071.JPG

It's from this website, so I'm not sure if the owner will allow it or not.

• http://www.freewebs.com/hurricanereplenishingproject/images.htm

Hurricanehink 03:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Class

I lowered it to stub, seeing as there's only one sentence for impact. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow. It looks great now. It must be at least a start class. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 12:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

What more does it need for B class? Hurricanehink (talk) 16:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Nothing. You were right to put it on GAN. I doubt any more pictures are available, so I'm not sure what else this could need. The person who reviews this on GAN might be able to help. --Coredesat 02:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Yea, there are some pictures in the newspaper archive, though all are copyrighted. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

GA Pass

Good job, as usual. Two notes before it makes its inevitable FAC run:

1. Consider getting a source on the last part, about it being one of four Cat 5's not to be retired.
2. A few areas could use some minor cleanup in terms of prose. It reads fine, but could use a copyeditor before you explore further promotion.

Congrats on another great hurricane article. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I think it should instantly be upgraded to A-class. CrazyC83 21:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

If Hink's record is any indication, this will be a FA in a month anyway. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :) Hurricanehink (talk) 23:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You were off by about two weeks... too early Titoxd^(?!?) 20:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Almost ready for FAC

I think this is almost ready for WP:FAC personally. CrazyC83 01:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone opposed to me putting it up for FAC? I currently have Fabian up, so if there's some outstanding objections I might need some help getting it done. However, Edith seems ready. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

No objections here. CrazyC83 05:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 14:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Rapidly, Rapidly, Rapidly.....

In the intro of the page you use the word "rapidly" 3 times. Maybe you should change this, as this article is being reviewed for FA status.-Hairchrm 06:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Broken link

The link for the last ref ([1]) is broken. --- RockMFR 23:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixing. Apparently the NHC changes the page name every year (so it is now at [2]). —Cuiviénen 00:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

And the Wayback Machine doesn't have a record of it, as it blocks the spider via robots.txt. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 00:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Try web cite - http://www.webcitation.org Raul654 05:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Nope, doesn't work either. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 07:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

A face.

Is it just me or does that picture resemble a face with it's cheeks puffed up and blowing...weird. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GothmogII (talk • contribs) 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

Hey, you're right! Brutannica 03:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Since it's a FA, it has been vandalized a bit. Semi-protection until off front page? -Domovoi 17:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Nah, it's still manageable. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 21:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Hurricane Edith (1971). 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/20061011202057/http://www.vvm.com/~curtis/AMSTCTor.html to http://www.vvm.com/~curtis/AMSTCTor.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061002013500/https://www.fema.gov/news/event.fema?id=1516 to http://www.fema.gov/news/event.fema?id=1516
• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 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) 21:57, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

---

Hurricane Edith (1971) → Hurricane EdithHurricane Edith – Much more prominent than any other Ediths. Thus this article is considered by me primary topic. --SMB99thx XD (contribs) 09:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose no need to pick Top Hurricane Edith, the 1963 and 1955 ones still did damage. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose per above, not a clear primary topic. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:11, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose no it's not the primary topic because it's not more prominent by a wide major than the others. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 19:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose - Negative, ghostrider, for the same reasons already listed. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 21:46, 29 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.

WP:URFA/2020

• Decent amount of scholarly literature discussed here (I tried to weed out earlier Ediths but there are some still here)
• The article claims there is no known Mexico impact. While I haven't checked Mexican newspapers, I would implore that impact definitely did occur. The storm made landfall in Mexico twice. The Mexican gov't produced [3] and [4] detailing the rainfall.

This feels so wrong on so many levels, but I regretfully have to send this to WP:FARGIVEN since there's a lot missing. CCI check is not done. Noah^Talk 20:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Ping Do you still have the same concerns listed above for this article? If so, would you be interested in bringing this article to WP:FAR? Z1720 (talk) 14:52, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

No progress has been made. I don't have the time to raise a FAR and participate since I am heading into finals. Noah, AA^Talk 22:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)