# Talk:1952 Groundhog Day tropical storm

Since it was a tropical storm, the correct name should be 1952 Groundhog Day Tropical Storm. Jdorje 21:21, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
'When the storm formed in the western Caribbean Sea in February, it became the only Atlantic storm in history'  I guessing this means to form in February, but as I'm no expert but shouldnt a bit be added? Bevo74 08:10, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I disaggree. 1952 Groundhog Day Tropical Storm is too wordy. Remove tropical. Mentioning it in the article should be sufficient. -- Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 22:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

This article isn't bad.  It needs better wikification, more on the impact, maybe a few more records listed. Jdorje 07:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, there is very little notable information here. Jdorje 01:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
...and virtually no references.  Thegreatdr 19:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:1952 Groundhog Day tropical storm/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Theres nothing wrong with this article so im passing it 

Jason Rees (talk) 17:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that as the storm became extratropical at 0000 UTC on Feb. 4, the dissipation date should be listed as the 4th. Unless, of course, it became extratropical by 0000 UTC. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:41, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, we know at 0000 UTC, it was an extratropical cyclone. Therefore, it must have become an extratropical cyclone slightly before then, as ex. transition takes a while. That's why it should be the 3rd. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:43, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
True, although we should really be following the official designations; thus, if it was officially deemed ET on February 4, then it officially dissipated on that day. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
That's not how the NHC does it. Hurricane Frances became an EC at 0000 on September 9, but they say it lasted until the 8th. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Good enough for me. You win. :) –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)