Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

Not sufficiently notable for a separate article; its effects on the wildfires were extremely minimal to none, and Category 4 hurricanes are common in this basin. Storms like Hurricane Kilo that also crossed over don't have articles. Jasper Deng (talk) 09:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are at the wrong page. Anyways, it was a heavy contributor to the Hawaii fires. Nanchang17 (talk) 11:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
came from the 2023 pacific hurricane season page Nanchang17 (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nanchang17: It was not.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
what are you talking about Nanchang17 (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it has Nanchang17 (talk) 11:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Even if you do not think it is worthy of an article, it is a pretty lengthy article with nearly 30K bytes and on the Wiki there are sometimes pages with 15k bytes even getting GA? I do not think this should be merged. Insendieum (talk) 12:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It can be comfortably condensed. We do not need intricate detail that only interests a specific audience.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose — This storm was heavily responsible for the devastating wildfires in Hawaii, was the longest lived storm of the 2023 Pacific hurricane season, and was one of the longest lived and longest tracked tropical cyclones in the Pacific on record, as well as the second longest lived storm of 2023 after Cyclone Freddy. VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022 (talk) 12:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022: It quite literally did not. An NHC forecaster refuted that.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I still think an article should be kept because this storm is one of only a handful of East Pacific storms to make it all the way to the West Pacific and become re-classified as a typhoon upon reaching that basin, and it has a very fascinating meteorological history. VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022 (talk) 18:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It still holds a lot of records, and hurricane kilo has an article Nanchang17 (talk) 14:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
1 against +1 people Nanchang17 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is zero proof of Dora causing the wildfires, lmao -CarterStormTracking, on a phone 2600:1003:B116:24E5:5477:8419:9DCF:BC80 (talk) 12:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ZERO? ABSOLUTELY ZERO?! Wikipedia is not a joke. Also, CarterStormTraking is not used as "proof" in this case, refer to NHC. Nanchang17 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, since it has some significant meteorological history despite its minimal (questionable) impacts, similar to other Pacific systems like the aforementioned Kilo, 1978's Fico, 1992's Tina, 1999's Dora, 2014's Genevieve and 2018's Hector, which all have articles for their own. Impacts and desctruction on human population shoudn't be the sole determinator for WP:N, meteorological significance should also matter. ABC paulista (talk) 14:02, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’m neutral on this but I would like to point out that Kilo does have an article, and it also has notable impacts in Hawaii. JayTee⛈️ 16:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, just because this article exists but another doesn’t is a WP:OSE argument. JayTee⛈️ 17:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency is important on Wikipedia. The governing guideline is WP:SPLIT and the size of 2023 Pacific hurricane season does not current merit it at only 34 KB of readable prose per WP:SIZERULE.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Dora has a notable enough meteorological history for this to be here. Very few western hemisphere hurricanes become classified as typhoons within their lifetimes. Add in the fact that it was an enabler for the Hawai'i wildfires I think this article is worth staying as is.
zoey (trooncel) 17:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Trooncel: It was not an enabler, as Papin poitned out.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose definitely some notability: was partially responsible for Hawaii wildfires, very long article, and a fascinating meteorological history. Definetly notable in my opinion. 2600:4041:47C:400:9A3:F75C:31C:8EDC (talk) 21:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose The fact that this small tropical cyclone was able to cross through three basins was incredible to me and it's amazing how it didn't get enough media coverage. Lack of media coverage doesn't preclude an article by the way, so I'm going oppose. ChessEric 23:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose - Very notable in terms of the 2023 Hawaii wildfires, the large difference in atmospheric pressure... Also holds some records like one the few hurricanes that:
1: Crossed 180°E (Westbound), rare
2: Reclassified as Typhoon when crossing 180°E, very rare

Despite lack of media coverage as mentioned by @ChessEric, it is not one of the contributing factors whether or not a hurricane has an article. Nanchang17 (talk) 15:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose A contributor to Lahaina wildfires that likely killed more than a hundred people and caused billions of dollars in damages. While the media attention is questionable, the impacts are significant. Tropical cyclone records shouldn't matter in my opinion, but this article should exist. MarioJump83 (talk) 00:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit unsure on what should be done with Dora but I'd rather it be its own thing to make sure all of Dora is in one place and not awkwardly spread out across the Hurricane and Typhoon season. Also, the article has 28,000 bytes and I am not sure what is too specific for general audiences, especially since its less than 30,000 bytes. ✶Mitch199811 01:39, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge, per nom. All of the things within this article can be summed up on the season page, fairly easy. Also it really isn't all that notable for the storm to cross three basins, as it has happened multiple times before, and again can easily be mentioned within the 2023 PHS article. As for the wildfires, Phillipe Papin (a respected meteorologist who works for the National Hurricane Center) as well as a few other meteorologists did a good analysis of this event, and pretty clearly showed that the hurricane in question had a very small role in the wildfires, only really helping to enhance a pressure gradient that was already there to some degree beforehand. In all, nothing within this article really sticks out as notable or as anything worth saving an article for, that we can't mention within the larger season page. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 05:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hurricane Dora (2023)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jasper Deng (talk · contribs) 09:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Immediately failed per immediate failure criterion 1 (WP:GACR), namely that it fails WP:V (GACR 2), because the following are dubious and are likely false: "However, the storm's high winds south of Hawaii, together with an anticyclone to the north of Hawaii, produced strong gradient winds over the islands, which in turn helped cause the 2023 Hawaii wildfires"; "...for portions of the various islands in expectation of the hurricane helping enhance trade winds in conjunction with an ongoing drought.[15] A steep pressure gradient between a strong anticyclone to the north of Hawaii and Dora to the south produced incredibly strong gradient winds..."; it also fails to give WP:DUE weight (GACR 4) considering the amount of media coverage about the storm in connection with the wildfire. The article must also be assessed for general notability as it is questionable whether it even needs its own article.--Jasper Deng (talk) 09:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"steep pressure gradient between a strong anticyclone to the north of Hawaii and Dora to the south produced incredibly strong gradient winds..." it is true. Go ask the reviewer who accepted it. Nanchang17 (talk) 14:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nanchang17 These claims are disputed by NHC meteorologist Philippe Papin and others. And Jasper Deng was the reviewer of this GA nom, and was correct in immediately failing it. Please refrain from bringing up Wikipedia policy/practices without having a thorough understanding of them yourself. JayTee⛈️ 16:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@JayTee32 Then who accepted this former draft to be an article Nanchang17 (talk) 00:28, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nanchang17 That is irrelevant to this review, simply because someone accepted a draft doesn’t mean they decide what is and isn’t true in an article, our sources do that. The question at hand here is whether this article passes WP:V, and it clearly does not. Nor are any of these comments relevant to a failed GA review. JayTee⛈️ 01:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As this article is about hurricanes, where are the impacts? There's one in the lead but there should be a separate section to explain the hurricane's relationship with the developing anticyclone that led to dry winds and eventual Lahaina wildfire. Until now this article should fail GA. MarioJump83 (talk) 00:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MarioJump83 There will be expansion coming soon, please wait. Nanchang17 (talk) 00:44, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@MarioJump83 And also, it is ALL the Hawaii fires, not only lahaina Nanchang17 (talk) 00:44, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but please don't shout or yell when responding to people. MarioJump83 (talk) 19:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]