The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In the lead and body, should damages be adjusted for inflation in a parenthetical? I am assuming they were $188 million in 2001, which is >$333 million today.
"...Eastern Pacific Ocean, which quickly reorganized" I am not familiar with meteorological terminology; is this inferring the ocean is doing the reorganizing, or the storm?
Does "the Hurricane Hunters" refer to anyone specifically or just weather hunters in general? If the latter, the linked article does not use capitals to describe them; if the former, is there a more accurate link or title to use for them?
Even as someone who is not familiar with this science, the Meteorological History section was straightforward and I was able to follow it without much issue.
WHOO! Sorry I just gotta thank you for pointing that out. I try and strike the balance between scientific terms but not getting too jargony. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 6,000 people in 45 shelters could be clarified as just in Baja
Perhaps a statement at the start of the Impact section that is like "But Nicaragua did not sustain any major damage" would make that intro a little bit more comprehensive and fluid
That's a tricky thing to prove. We don't usually include when storms don't do something, like if storms fail to cause much damage. So I moved that to the met history. It felt out of place before. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Earlier while Juliette was near its peak intensity..." earlier as in comparison to what?
I changed it to more of a space reference, when it was offshore southern Mexico. The wind measurement was a little bit notable since it was gale force, which warranted some tropical storm warnings. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"one related to an American surfer" was the person who died related to an American surfer? If so, I don't think that is particularly relevant to include
I've done some minor ce and wikilinking throughout the article; as always, feel free to revert anything you take umbrage with and we can discuss further
References
Are The Frederick News Post and Fairbanks Daily News Miner reliable sources for Pacific hurricanes? My inclination is yes but I would like to check because I can't find very much on them. All other sources look to be generally reliable.
I think the fact that newspapers covered the storm is more of reflection of its notability, showing up in farflung places. I might be able to replace some of those references with URLs, but that was from the early internet. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Earwig is currently down for me, I will include checks for close paraphrasing in my spot checks but don't anticipate any issues.
Spot-checks (10% of refs) for source integrity and plagiarism on refs 4, 29, 31 (this seems to state a US surfer was killed, not someone related to them), and 49 are all good. Ref 39, "Latitude 38" seems to be a local blog. The knocking down of some ships also seems more inconsequential than a lot of the other impact. Is there a strong need for this sentence and reference?
Regarding Latitude 38, I felt it was useful to include it to have some form of impact outside of Los Cabos. By the nature of reporting, the tourist and popular areas tend to get the most coverage. If that still seems too minor, I can remove it, but I liked having an additional example of impacts. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Other
The infobox is concise and informative
All images are public domain and properly licensed, and have good captions
The article is stable, with no recent edit warring or major vandalism
Summary
The article is well written with only a few very minor points of correction. If you wouldn't mind pinging me once you've responded to my nitpicks, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you for a very thorough and informative article! Fritzmann (message me) 02:01, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.