Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of the 1983 Atlantic hurricane season

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 by User:Scorpion0422 22:30, 2 December 2008 [1].

Timeline of the 1983 Atlantic hurricane season[edit]

Despite this article just being created, there is nothing more I can really add. The Timeline follows the structure of the other Atlantic Timelines and all storms are included. With nothing more I can really do with it, I am nominating it for Featured List. All thoughts and comments are welcome :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:55, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the formation for TD 1? Also, on the bottom, should it really say "none" for timelines before and after? Is that the format? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed both of them. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support- Even though I rated this article like 20-30 min ago, I think it is good for a FLC.----Neka 2008! 23:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you think I am biased, you can get rid of my support.--Neka 2008! 23:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review by SRX [TRUco]

Comment - excellent list, comprehensive prose and list, one thing however - The season ended about a month and a half later on September 30. ~ this needs to be more specific i.e one month and 28 days per WP:Weasel.--TRU_CO 23:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, changed it to "month and 16 days later" Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:37, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - my review was addressed in order to comply with WP:WIAFL.--TRU_CO 23:39, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - the only thing i saw wrong with it was the year in the lead but since it was so minor i just corrected it Jason Rees (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ The timeline picture is very confusing at first glance. Please consider making a new one, as it took me a good while to understand it. - NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 00:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should have put a note here first, sorry. There is currently a bug on the site which I cannot fix. It has been reported and hopefully it is being worked on. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Err....That auto edit killed the timeline...It's a very fragile image, if one thing in it is changed, it might not show up until the correct spacing (I don't know why, it just works) is done to allow just the image to show. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meddled around to fix timeline.--Neka 2008! 00:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is very interesting. In that case, I'll still keep my oppose up, but please don't take it personally, as I just want all of the Featured Lists to be at the best possible detail. Also, the picture is broken in every previous revision and the current one. - NuclearWarfare ^{contact me}_{My work} 00:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. BTW, when I said killed, I meant that the image was a ? in a box, now it at least shows the image. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See bug 16085 regarding the timeline function. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The timeline as I (Rambo's Revenge) see it.

~~Oppose~~ based on the bug with the timeline. While the bug may be beyond control, I'm afraid that I cannot support the featuring of this list while it remains inaccessible to many users. Hopefully a way around this can be found, as the rest of the list looks very good. The thumbnail (right) is what I see. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 15:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I see with the timeline too. How is the page inaccessible? Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is the timeline that is inaccessible. It has no text on it, no legend, no labels, nothing. However the code suggests it should have labels etc.
e.g. from:01/05/1983 till:01/06/1983 text:May
Notice that no text is shown in the screenshot image (right). Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's what the bug does. It doesn't show text for me either. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:24, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know that is what the bug does. I am saying that because it should display text, and I cannot endorse the supporting of the list with this bug in it. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 16:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can i just point out to all those who are opposing this FLC because of the bug, thats affecting ALL of the timelines at the minute that have been edited in the last month. That the Timeline of the 2003 Atlantic hurricane season passed its FLC with the timeline image not showing up the text.[[2]] Jason Rees (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I advise people to not oppose an article because of a bug that is affecting all such timelines, and cannot be addressed by the nominator. It will likely be disregarded by the closing FL director, as it is not actionable. Thank you. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have a Solution, I made an image out of the timeline, This is for 2003, but see please. --Neka 2008! 23:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2003's Timeline

Great job, so much for it being "not actionable"!Yobmod (talk) 10:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, didn't think of an image at first ;) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: There is now an ongoing centralised discussion about opposes based on bug 16085 here. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Opposing~~ with current timeline bug. The image idea might be an ok stopgap, but the current state is certainly not. An article in which the info is not displayed due to a bug is certainly not an example of wikipedia's best work. Why aren't people fixing it instead of submitting FLC like this?Yobmod (talk) 15:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because its a wikipedia wide problkem Jason Rees (talk) 15:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing I can do either. I barely know how the timeline image works, let alone how to fix it. As Jason Rees stated, the 2003 timeline was promoted with the same issue, as was the Timeline of the 2005 Pacific hurricane season. I understand that the timeline is an issue, but what I don't understand is how something that cannot be fixed by us (I think) is such an issue. JW, any thoughts on the actual Timeline not the image? Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the tempate isn't working, why use it? Make another one, using table wikiformatting, or find another way to show the info. I understand it is not the articles editors fault that this broke, but it still doesn't show wikipedia's best work, unless our best template editors are really that bad.Yobmod (talk) 21:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Elena85 has done with the 2003 timeline, I created an image of it and added the text, I've already put it on the page so things should be good on that end (just with the timeline, not the overall issue with the bug). Cyclonebiskit (talk) 18:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I struck my oppose mow that image is there.

Further comment: why does August 27th have 2 entries, both with the same cite? Shouldn't they be combined?Yobmod (talk) 09:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, the second one was the 28th and the second 28th is now the 29th Cyclonebiskit (talk) 12:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Much better with the image there now. I took it upon myself to do an image mapping to provide the links that the unbugged timeline should. Hope you don't mind. Only thing is that in the image it should say Alicia not Anita. Otherwise, fine Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, oops, I'll fix it soon and thanks for mapping it :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy! I now support this nomination. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 19:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

Sorry I didn't comment sooner, I was waiting for all the image issues to blow over.
"during which ~~only~~ four tropical cyclones formed."
Image captions that are not complete sentences should not have periods at the end.
"~~However~~, the first named storm, Hurricane Alicia, formed on August 15. "
"Hurricane Alicia had its name retired due to the loss of life and severe damage in Texas."-->Hurricane Alicia had its name retired due to the fatalities and severe damage caused in Texas.
"Hurricane Barry was a weak Category 1 hurricane which traveled almost due west across the Gulf of Mexico for most of its track, before making landfall in extreme northern Mexico."-->Hurricane Barry was a weak Category 1 hurricane that traveled almost due west across the Gulf of Mexico for most of its track before making landfall in extreme northern Mexico.
"Tropical Depression One passes over the island of Saint Lucia with winds of 35 mph (55 km/h)" Needs a period at the end.
"Hurricane Alicia strengthens into a major hurricane—a storm with winds of 111 mph " Needs a period at the end.
You've mixed Template:Citation with Template:Cite XXX, per MOS, you should only use one format. I suggest changing refs 10 and 11 to use the cite news template. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok, at least you did comment. :) I have correct all but one of the issues you addressed. The only one not done is the second to last one you mentioned since the period is already there. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:58, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, didn't see the line break there. Why did you delete that sentence with the statistics about Alicia? Dabomb87 (talk) 18:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I just put it back. I accidentally lumped it together with the sentence before it which needed to be changed. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 18:16, 24 November 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.