# Talk:Hurricane Iwa

More impact. Jdorje 08:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

http://www.dabase.net/iwa.jpg
It's a messy, yet readable, picture of Iwa. Could we use this? (BTW: The source of the picture is at http://www.dabase.net/donteat.htmJake52

Why go with messy when there is an image with/from CLASS?   =)  Thegreatdr 20:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Could you check that link again? That doesn't work... :( Hurricanehink (talk) 02:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. Grr... you have to buy a DVD of it... Oh well. That works. Hurricanehink (talk) 03:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
You don't have to buy a DVD.  Just go through the interactive web page, select AVHRR, and you can grab an image.  After specifying latitude/longitude, hit one of the number buttons and at the bottom will be the image.  Thegreatdr 18:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, ok. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok that's it, obsessive chasing up of storm pictures for me now I guess! I'm concentrating collating a lot of that sort of stuff at the moment. One question though, the data files which you can download from CLASS - what do you need to read them?--Nilfanion (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
They're .GIFS.  It should require nothing special.  Thegreatdr 17:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I know that - its just you can add the datasets to your cart and then get raw data available on the FTP server. For the purposes here the GIFs are all we need, but I was wondering what those files where (2MB as opposed to 10K...)--Nilfanion (talk) 19:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The twenty-third tropical storm and twelfth and final hurricane of the 1982 Pacific hurricane season, Iwa developed from an active trough of low pressure near the equator on November 19. Doesn't flow well
A triple space under see also
Only minor and shouldn't take more then a minute or two to fix so pass. M3tal H3ad 04:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after it passed in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to update the access dates of the website sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Not once does the article specify it uses UTC. In the absence of a time zone, it's not unreasonable to assume the article is using local time. It should either be specified, or use local, and it needs to be sure to conform to one or the other. --Golbez (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I added a notice. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  15:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
That doesn't help the reader. A reader comes along and sees that it says it hit the island on November 24, and obviously at least one reader has been confused by this as, locally, it hit on November 23. We can't assume everyone confused by this will edit the article and look at the comment. --Golbez (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
There, that should do it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  16:19, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
I repeat that comments do not help readers. We need a single solution that also tells readers when it happened. Or, we make it clear that it happened on one day local time, but then give the exact time in UTC. --Golbez (talk) 16:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Wait, how do comments not help readers? I think it's rather clear now. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  16:26, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Because readers don't see comments? They will only be seen if they edit. Why should someone feel the need to edit unless they think something is wrong? And why would they think it's wrong that the hurricane hit Kauai on November 24, Hawaiian time? It's certainly not unreasonable to assume the readers will assume, unless otherwise stated, that articles use local time. --Golbez (talk) 16:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
What do you suggest then? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  16:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Well maybe it should be brought up with WPTC, but otherwise my suggestion is we say it hit on November 23 local time, and then give the official time of landfall in UTC. But we can't assume readers will either know WPTC guidelines, or that there are comments specifying UTC. --Golbez (talk) 16:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Ooh, like we do in the timeline articles. I changed it to be like that. Think that works? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  19:51, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
That's definitely an improvement. Thanks! --Golbez (talk) 19:53, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane Iwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080220150942/http://www-ks.cr.usgs.gov/Kansas/pubs/reports/wsp.2502.sum82.html to http://www-ks.cr.usgs.gov/Kansas/pubs/reports/wsp.2502.sum82.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150216122056/http://www.mothernature-hawaii.com/county_kauai/hurricane_what_are-kauai.htm to http://www.mothernature-hawaii.com/county_kauai/hurricane_what_are-kauai.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)