Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2003 Sri Lanka cyclone/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13 October 2014 [1].

---

2003 Sri Lanka cyclone

Nominator(s): ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

This article is about a damaging and deadly flood in Sri Lanka, a small island southeast of India. That is the main focus, but the storm also had larger reaching effects, such as potentially contributing to a deadly heat wave that killed 1,900 people. It serves as a great source for flooding damage in a tropical island country, and I am sure it meets all of the FA criteria. I hope you enjoy reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:22, 30 September 2014 (UTC) Withdrawing. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - definitely an interesting article, but one that would benefit from a going-over for both grammar/flow and MOS compliance. Just in the lead we've got "although increased wind shear weakening it" and "on May 19 as a re-intensified into a cyclonic storm" and "After a 15 day period". Happy to strike once a copy-edit has been done. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:13, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

As I comb through the article, I note that it seems to already be in fairly good shape. Before I finish my copyediting and offer my support, I'd like to see resolved a few issues that I'm not quite comfortable tackling myself.

• I think the Sri Lanka impact section might require some basic restructuring. You wait until the third paragraph to introduce the disaster with "the rains related to the cyclone caused severe flooding and landslides, mostly in Ratnapura and Nuwara Eliya districts", even though there are details of damage in those areas in the second paragraph.
• Most of the article seems to suggest that Sri Lanka had been saturated with rainfall before the storm, but one district was apparently in a severe drought. I know the climate is extremely variable on the island, but it's a bit of a trip to learn that an area the size of West Virginia experienced the full gamut of hydrology issues at the same time. Any way to make those facts jive a bit better (or at least make them more directly contradictory)?
• Farmers in the region also lost some of their rice paddies to the high waters,[11] although only about 3% of the rice crop in the region was damaged, which was not expected to affect the harvest.[19] - the two given sources seem to disagree with each other, to an extent, with the more recent source informing us that damage to rice was minimal. Ref [11] was from while the storm was still active, and is based on what politicians said they saw, so I'm thinking it might not be so reliable.

Thoughts? – Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the copyedit, but I've changed my mind about this article. While I might nominate it in the future, this wouldn't affect any ongoing topics, and so I am withdrawing the nomination. Thank you all for the time so far. All comments here will be addressed before a future run. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 07:09, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.