Talk:Tropical Depression Two (2010)

Todo

It needs more non-NHC sources (NCDC has July reports out now). Also, the MH is decent, but it doesn't need to include every time the NHC changed the probability (from 30% to 40%, back down to 30%, etc.). The first sentence of the MH is unsourced. Don't speculate on its origins - if you don't know, just say when the NHC first started monitoring it.

All in all, good job though. Your writing has become much better - I actually look forward to you making articles now! Hurricanehink (talk) 16:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Who is this David mentioned several times in the reference section? The name is not in those references. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Ive fixed the references - its John not David.Jason Rees (talk) 01:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Nice. On to more issues. The main text of the article in the impact section with regards to rainfall is at odds with the rainfall graphic, and it somehow references the inland advisories without actual supporting inline references. That needs to be fixed. Also, the link to the last sentence is unable to support the last line, since that page deals with a different cyclone. This is bound to be noticed by the GAN reviewer. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Here are my comments from our IRC review today. I think (not sure though) you addressed most of this, but given the fact you left IRC about 10 minuets ago, here are my total comments/

• "Initially, intensification into a tropical storm was forecast by the National Hurricane Center (NHC), but due to its proximity to land, the depression never strengthened into such" forecast to anticipated so the tense is in agreement

 Done

• "Due to the systems weak intensity, there were no reports of wind damage across Texas or Mexico, although the storm did bring moderate rainfall to northern Mexico, which was devastated by Hurricane Alex just one week earlier." systems to system's

 Done

• The lead contains too many meteorological details, cut some out, add some impact in
  • There is no need in my opinion -- We will see what happens at GAN.
• "The origins of Tropical Depression Two can be traced back to a disorganized tropical wave that was first noted by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) on June 24 as it moved off the western coast of Africa, and into the Atlantic Ocean" no need to spell out NHC since you did it in the lead

 Done

• "Over the following 24 hours, significant development took place, leading to a higher probability of developing into a tropical depression.[2] " wikilink developing to tropical cyclonegenies

 Done

• "However, a defined surface circulation did not form before the wave moved over the Yucatan Peninsula and lost organization.[1][3][4]" wikilink atmospheric circulation

 Done

• "The system remained disorganized as it traversed the peninsula; it eventually emerged into the Gulf of Mexico on July 7.[5]" wikilink Gulf of Mexico, not that major of a place

 Done

• "Situated over water once more, the wave was able to gradually develop as it moved in a northwesterly direction. " two things 1) was it ever previously over warm water 2) wilink to sea surface temperatures

 Done

• "Following a reconnaissance mission from the Hurricane Hunters, the NHC noted that there was a high chance of the system developing into a tropical cyclone within the following day or two.[6]" no need for from the Hurricane Hunter and wtf is a high chance of developing? I know what it means but the layman wont

 Done

• "Early on July 8, additional data from the Hurricane Hunters indicated that the system had developed a closed circulation and the NHC classified it as a tropical depression, the second of the season.[7]" wikilink Hurricane Hunters and what exact time on July 8 did it occur

 Done

• "At this time, the system was situated roughly 250 mi (400 km) southeast of Brownsville, Texas.[1] At the same time, the depression also attained its peak intensity with maximum sustained winds of 35 mph (55 km/h) and a minimum barometric pressure of 1005 mbar (hPa; 29.68 inHg).[1]" combine these two sentences, they both start with the same word .

 Done

• "During a reconnaissance mission at 1200 UTC, Hurricane Hunters found winds near tropical storm intensity; however, land-based observations did not support this and the depression was not classified as Tropical Storm Bonnie.[1]" no need for "Bonnie"

 Done

• "Realizing that the tropical depression would remain disorganized, the NHC discontinued its predictions of it intensifying into a tropical storm.[8] Later that day, the depression made landfall in South Padre Island, Texas at 1515 UTC with winds of 35 mph (55 km/h).[9]" Why are you saying it move inland when you said it a sentence or two ago

 Done

• "The tropical depression weakened slightly while moving near the Mexico/Texas border, where the NHC had discontinued advisories on the system.[10]" hyphen between Mexico and Texas and no need for "had"

 Done

• "Immediately after Tropical Depression Two was classified, a tropical storm warnings for the state of Texas, covering the coastline from Baffin Bay to the northern mouth of the Rio Grande River." make warnings singular

 Done

• "Subsequent coastal flooding and flash flood warnings were issued by the local National Weather Services in southern and eastern Texas as the NHC predicted 4 to 8 in (100 to 200 mm) of rain, with possibly 10 in (250 mm) in some areas.[12]" which ones?
  • I also believe there is no need here.
• "Alerts were also issued for the Mexican states of Tamaulipas, Nuevo León and Coahuila, warning of heavy rains, flooding and landslides.[13] " what kind of alert? the states warned people? do you mean officials warned people
  • Fixed the second part of the problem; I don't understand Spanish, so I don't know which alert.
• "After Tropical Depression Two made landfall in Texas, all of the tropical storm warnings associated with the storm were discontinued.[15]" singular "tropical storm warnings"
  • What?
• "As dissipating Tropical Depression Two moved inland, the HPC advisories indicated that much of eastern and southern Texas experienced rainfall of at least 1 in (25 mm), with the exception of Corpus Christi and Laredo." no need for the TD two part, already covered

 Done

• "Throughout Tamaulipas, Mexico, relatively little rain fell in relation to the depression. Matamoros recorded rainfall for roughly two hours before the system passed through the region.[21]" this should go before the damage total

 Done

• Wikilink NHC and NCDC in refs on first usage

 Done

• Cut out "staff writer" in ref #14
  • You mean ref. 13?  Done

Otherwise, it's great. Put  Done templates when you fix there, though I believe most have been fixed. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane}

• I put the done templates on the ones I fixed, and commented on the ones I disagree with. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 18:33, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions before GA review

Thank you Cyclonebiskit for improving the article, I would agree with the GA nomination. I cannot review this article for GA, since I am a "significant contributor", but I have a few minor suggestions before someone else looks it over for GAN. I think you should include a specific url for a reference to the $80 million in damage done, because the link for Ref #20 brings you to the main database search page, and I doubt anyone would like to go digging through to find out if the money value is true. Thank you again for your improvements, and good luck on the GA! --12george1 (talk) 20:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Depression Two (2010)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TropicalAnalystwx13 20:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer Thegreatdr (talk)

This shouldn't be too hard...I'll start later on today. TropicalAnalystwx13 20:10, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Good Article Review

The article Tropical Depression TWO (2010) is reasonably well-written, so I will pass that part. All links in the article are good, meaning they are not broken, and they all lead to relevant sources. The information in the article is factual, and verifiable. The article is easy to understand and clear. However, one thing that I would try to work on is expanding the Meteorological History and maybe even the Preparations and Impacts section just a little. There are only two pictures, so I would try to add more..but the two images up on the article are licensed and appropriate. The article is written from a neutral point of view, and the article is stable.

Good Article Review Checklist (Criteria)

1. Is it well written:

2. Factually Accurate and verifiable:

3. Broad in its coverage: - (Work on expansion)

4. Neutral: -

5. Stable -

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images -

7. Overall -

Pass/Fail (The issue mentioned below hasn't been fixed, and it was brought up 5 weeks ago.)

TropicalAnalystwx13 21:14, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm putting the previous comment here so it doesn't get lost in the review process, since these issues appear to have been overlooked. The main text of the article in the impact section with regards to rainfall is at odds with the rainfall graphic (it talks about 3" of rain across much of Eastern Texas, which just wasn't true), and it somehow references the inland advisories without actual supporting inline references. Also, the link to the last sentence is unable to support the last line, since that page deals with a different cyclone (Alex). Last I checked, the Alex article does not refer to Tropical Depression Two impacts at all. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

The precipitation information within the impact section of the article still doesn't match the rainfall graphic to the right, after 5 weeks. I'm not the primary reviewer, so it's not completely up to me to pass/fail, but I recommend it be failed since the changes needed here were straightforward, but not followed. Thegreatdr (talk) 08:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I think it should be put on hold for the time being. There was only one issue within the article, but it hasn't been fixed. I don't know how to put it on hold though. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Normally, holds are placed for one week. It's been 5 weeks since the comments were made about the disjointed impact section. As primary reviewer, it's your call. Whatever you decide I'll support. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh...then I guess you can go ahead and fail it... TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 00:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm a secondary reviewer. If I still understand the policy right, only the primary reviewer can pass or fail. Thegreatdr (talk) 03:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Depression Two (2010)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 01:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• Hey TAWX; I'll be reviewing this soon. HurricaneFan25 01:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• I've placed this GAN on hold pending the addressing of the comments below. HurricaneFan25 15:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   The two things that quickly stand out to me is that there's a few rather terse sentences in the article. Try to fix those.

   The second is the usage of "abbreviation" or "uncommon" jargon — for example, the NHC noted in their Tropical Weather Outlook.... IMO, the best option would be to use the NHC noted that... The first usage of "NHC" in the article doesn't explain what it was. You should always try to keep the reader "informed" throughout the article. The origins of Tropical Depression Two can be traced back to a disorganized tropical wave that was first noted by the NHC... should be The origins of Tropical Depression Two are from a disorganized tropical wave that was first noted by the National Hurricane Center (NHC)... The beginning of the sentence is needlessly wordy; the above wording is more concise, IMO. The link is formatted as such per this.

   It formed on July 8 from a tropical wave that emerged off the western coast of Africa and crossed the Atlantic Ocean without any development. — remove the and and reword it a bit to It formed from a tropical wave that emerged off the coast of Africa. Given the next sentence, it isn't necessary to say "July 8" just yet. It's somewhat obvious that it crossed the Atlantic, given the lede (2010 Atlantic hurricane season).

   However, once in the western Gulf of Mexico, conditions become more conducive for development, and it is estimated that Tropical Depression Two formed at 0600 UTC on July 8. UTC should be linked here, not everyone knows what it is. Also, you should indicate that it traveled into the Gulf of Mexico. However, when it entered the Gulf of Mexico, it encountered a conducive environment for tropical cyclone development, and was designated Tropical Depression Two at 0600 UTC on July 8.

   Intensification into a tropical storm was initially anticipated by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) — two problems here. Look at the linking problem a few points above; also, you should explain that tropical storm is a status on the Saffir–Simpson Hurricane Scale — which would probably be best conveyed through a link to the article.

   the depression never failed to attain the status — I hope that was a mistake!

   The depression later made landfall on South Padre Island, Texas — you're over-using "depression" in the lede; I'd rather see "it" here, and "later" is unnecessary. It made landfall on South Padre Island, Texas

   and dissipating the following day — watch the voice you use; don't switch between passive. and dissipated the following day

   Due to the system's weak intensity, there were no reports of wind damage across Texas or Mexico — change to Due to the system's weak intensity, there were no reports of damage inflicted by winds across Texas or Mexico — it explains it better.

   an area severely affected by Hurricane Alex just one week previous. — explain it better here; reword it to which suffered the effects of Hurricane Alex one week earlier. or something like that.

   as it moved off the western coast of Africa, and into the Atlantic Ocean. Cut off the last bit; put it into the next sentence. as it moved off the western coast of Africa.

   Moving towards the west over the Atlantic Ocean — see above

   until July 3, as it entered — remove unnecessary comma; until July 3 as it entered...

   Over the following 24 hours, continued organization occurred, and subsequently You already talked a bit about organization; maybe During the 24 hours that followed, it continued to coalesce, and the NHC subsequently increased the disturbance's chance of developing into a tropical cyclone. We don't link NHC here, but we rather simply use the abbreviation, as per if it is changed to the point a few spots above. Upped isn't a very "professional" term; increased is, and IMO, it just sounds better.

   However, a defined surface circulation did not form before the wave moved over the Yucatan Peninsula and lost organization — two problems here. The "however" should be removed. It should be reworded to something like A defined surface circulation did not form as a result of the wave's movement over the Yucatan Peninsula, and the system lost organization.

   The system remained disorganized as it traversed the peninsula; it eventually emerged into the Gulf of Mexico on July 7. The semicolon is unnecessary and should be replaced with an "and" and the "it" should be removed. Since it already entered the Gulf of Mexico, it should read The system remained disorganized as it traversed the peninsula and eventually re-emerged into the Gulf of Mexico on July 7.

   developing into a tropical cyclone within the next 48 hours — non-breaking space needed between "48" and "hours" per MOS:NBSP.

   had developed a closed circulation and the NHC — avoid passive voice; remove the "had".

   the second of the season — change it to making it the second of the hurricane season for clarity.

   Additionally, the depression — Remove the "additionally" as the previous sentence is not completely "linked" to this one.

   The NHC predicted that Tropical Depression Two → Tropical Depression Two was forecasted to...before making landfall in Mexico

   During a reconnaissance mission at 1200 UTC — During? It should be "following", which is more concise.

   Change the depression was not classified to the depression was not classified as a tropical storm for clarity.

   where the NHC discontinued advisories on the system — when, not where

   the Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (HPC) — Change link to Hydrometeorological Prediction Center (HPC) per above.

   early on July 10 — early during July 10

   A tropical storm warning was also issued by the government of Mexico, stretching from Rio San Fernando northward also to the mouth of the Rio Grande River — the current wording implies that the government of Mexico issued both wordings, which is incorrect. The United States only issues TRW/TRAs for its own territories; individual governments do that for theirs. This can be fixed by adding "in addition," before "a tropical storm warning" here.

   issued by the local National Weather Services — add a link to National Weather Service and reword as such, as offices is more clear: issued by local National Weather Service offices

   with possibly 10 in (250 mm) in some areas — weasels are wailing here. with 10 in (250 mm) locally.

   Alerts were also issued for the Mexican states of — what type of alerts? Can you clarify?

   A link to Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil, Prevención y Mitigación de Desastres is necessary to clarify what the agency is, and should be formatted like this per above: [[Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil, Prevención y Mitigación de Desastres|Sistema Nacional de Protección Civil (National Civil Protection System)]]

   the highest level — it's clear here now; change it to the highest level on the scale

   Two funnel clouds were reported in relation to the depression: one near Rockport and the other near Victoria. — use an em dash, like this (—) instead of a comma. Two funnel clouds were reported in relation to the depression — one near...

   As dissipating Tropical Depression Two moved inland, the HPC advisories → As Tropical Depression Two dissipated, it moved inland and the HPC's advisories indicated that much of eastern and southern Texas experienced rainfall of at least 1 in (25 mm), with the exception of...

   had peaked at — remove "had" (passive voice)

   while the Victoria Regional Airport reports precipitation — use the correct tense. while the Victoria Regional Airport reported precipitation...

   dropped by Hurricane Alex just south of the Rio Grande River seems to imply that all of the rain from Alex fell just south of the Rio Grande River, which it didn't. This needs clarification.

   That's it.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Remember to use non-breaking spaces where necessary per MOS:NBSP

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   All citations appear to be fine — no dead ones, though reference #20 should cite a specific page as you did with references #15–17 if possible.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Thanks for the review! -- TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 17:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Tropical Depression Two (2010). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.milenio.com/node/482742
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2010/07/08/en-tamaulipas-ya-estan-en-alerta-roja-por-huracan
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent~ShowEvent~824013
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent~ShowEvent~819013
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwevent~ShowEvent~819012
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www2.esmas.com/noticierostelevisa/mexico/estados/184769/depresion-tropical-no-impacta-tamaulipas-se-desvia

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)