Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of North Carolina hurricanes

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

The list was promoted 15:55, 18 April 2008.

List of North Carolina hurricanes

I based this list off of List of Florida hurricanes, and I feel it is featured-worthy. There is one potential problem I should address right now. The article is based off of the four sub-articles, all of which are featured (except one, which is one FLC) and thus perfect sourcing is near-impossible. I hope that's not a problem, and I'll address any comments or concerns. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

"Floyd is considered the worst modern natural disaster " isn't Floyd a hurricane and did Floyd cause the worst modern natural disaster?
I'd expand the lead to two paragraphs.
" 17.5 percent" why not just 17.5%? And other instances..
"occassionally " should be occasionally.
1900-1949 should use en-dash so 1900–1949, same for 50-79.
Since this article is the overview, direct/indirect fatalities should be explained.
Suddenly the windspeeds switch to knots in the table. Why?
"Landfall Location" - Landfall location.
Why are some "unnamed" linked to named hurricanes? (I think I asked this before but can't remember the answer!)
Why are only some years linked in the table? And why the italics for one hurricane only?
I think you need some references for the 1900-1949 and the 1950-1979 sections.

That's it. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I clarified the Floyd thing, and added a ref. Regarding the lede, I opted to keep it short, since that's what List of Florida hurricanes did as well, and I figured that any more info would be redundant with the climatology section. Regarding the percentages, WP:MOS states Percent or per cent are commonly used to indicate percentages in the body of an article, with % usable for more scientific articles. Though this article is scientific, it usage is more for statistical purposes, so I think percent and not % is more appropriate. I added an actual table for deaths, which explains direct vs. indirect deaths. Regarding windspeeds, I opted not to put both mph and km/h in the table, and went for the less controversial "knot". I added the name to one of the unnamed hurricane links, since that is a more accepted name, but the other I left as a link; the Wikipedia title of the other one was the 1933 Outer Banks hurricane, but because the table specifies the landfall location (which was the Outer Banks), I thought it was redundant. I added the links to the years. The italicized names did mean those names are not official, but it wasn't that important, so I removed the italics. I hope that's good! ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether this should be here or on FAC. I'd clearly pass either one, so support. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 06:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Wonderfully written, greatly detailed, and should definitely be featured. Hello32020 (talk) 03:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good. Nice job! Gary King (talk) 07:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good article as ever by Hurricanehink 02blythed (talk) 10:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like The Rambling Man already mentioned all the issues, and they were all fixed perfectly. I can't see anything that should prevent this from being featured. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 13:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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