Talk:Tropical Storm Debby (1994)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
	The possible merging of this article has been discussed by editors of the WikiProject.

[edit] Why?

I see no reason for this storm to have a separate article... — jdorje (talk) 22:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Hurricanehink 23:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I wrote it because it was requested at the Article request and you agreed that there should be a separate artice on this storm. Storm05 13:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I only agreed because, at the time, I thought more information would have been available for a fuller article. That doesn't seem to be the case. I'll go back and revote for all articles. Hurricanehink 16:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I replied to your revotes. Storm05 17:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Also you did not revote all the storms you only revoted only the Alantic Storms from 1958 to 1999 and ignored the votes from the pre 1950 Atlantic storms, WPAC, EPAC and S. Hemisphere storms. Storm05 17:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I replied to your revotes. I'll to the others later. Hurricanehink 17:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I added damage totals Storm05 15:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh wow! I revoke my merge comment, and based on the damage this can stay. However, more is still needed. Hurricanehink 16:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. That's not enough damage and the article isn't that great. At least 15 dead and/or $300 million in damage is the threshold in my book. There are a couple storm articles that fail to meet that criteria but, then again, it's just my opinion. -- §Hurricane E RIC§^Damagesarchive 22:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

$294 million is close enough. The article isn't great, but there's always room for improvement. Hurricanehink 22:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm still quite uncomfortable with this one's existance. It's kind of like how I feel about the Cindy article. -- §Hurricane E RIC§^Damagesarchive 23:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Damn, it's that bad? J/K, but the article does need a lot of work. However, I think it is notable enough. Hurricanehink 01:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

<--- unindented... I'd like to think my copyedit(s) of this article went quite a way to improving it. NSL E _(T+C)^{(seen this?)} at 01:08 UTC (2006-04-12)