Talk:Typhoon Billie (1959)
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Hurricanehink in topic GA Review
Typhoon Billie (1959) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: August 30, 2014. (Reviewed version). |
A fact from Typhoon Billie (1959) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 September 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Billie (1959)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 20:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- I think the first sentence should be that it was the first typhoon tracked by the JTWC. That's a little more interesting than what's there.
- "Billie's affects" - any time it's a noun, use "effects". Ditto down in the impact section
- "JTWC bulletins and warnings commenced accordingly" - what was the storm number?
- I'm confused. Were the peak winds according to JMA or JTWC?
- I wouldn't really say "forcing" is the appropriate word when describing extratropical transition
- Anything more on the Japan deaths? That sounds pretty deadly without having much info
- "resulting in the additional displacement of people" - additional to what? The homeless in Taipei? I'd guess they became homeless because of this damage.
- Anything else for China?
All in all the article is decent. It just seems on the short side. I know it was 1959, so I'm not expecting too much. Just wondering if it's thorough or not. Cheers! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)