Talk:Typhoon Nanmadol (2004)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Nanmadol (2004)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 03:03, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

• "A quickly moving system" - I think "quickly moving" needs a hyphen.
  •  Done - Thanks for the rule of thumb. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• You should mention in the lead what the previous storms were that affected the Philippines.
  •  Done - Briefly described that the storms accounted for around 1,000 deaths. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Evacuation efforts assisted in moving almost 100,000 people to evacuation shelters."
  •  Done - Axed evacuation and said 'people into'. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Heavy rainfall, peaking at 1,090 mm (43 in), was documented in Taiwan and eastern China." - that implies 1,090 mm in both areas.
  •  Done - I didn't note China in the lead so I removed China. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Damage was particularly significant in Aichi Prefecture, totaling JP¥69.8 million (US$680,000) " - add a period
  •  Done - TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "spurred by the persistence of favorable developmental conditions" - a bit flowery. Try - "spurred by favorable conditions." It's not really development conditions, as the storm already formed by then.
  •  Done - TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "and exceeded the threshold for typhoon intensity twelve hours later" - similar to above. I think simpler wording would actually be better. Just say it became a typhoon twelve hours later.
  •  Done - TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Intensification briefly slowed following the reclassification to typhoon status but continued soon after." - so, did it weaken and then become a typhoon again? This is what I mean. Sometimes fancier wording can make an article harder to understand.
  •  Done - I meant that after the storm became a typhoon, intensification briefly slowed down, and the continued afterwards. I moved reclassification to typhoon status backwards to be a bit more chronologically accurate. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• Any reason you don't mention JTWC peak intensity? Otherwise, the infobox is unsourced
  •  Done - I wanted to stay away from adding in JTWC in the article so I decided to just source it in the lead. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• You should add when Nanmadol entered PAGASA area, as that's when it become "Yoyong". Right now, there's no source that says the storm was called Yoyong.
  •  Done - Cited in lead. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Due to the rapid motion of Nanmadol as a result of the nearby subtropical ridge" - you've said this before that the rapid motion was from the ridge.
  •  Done - Axed the second part. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "At 0000 UTC the next day" - specify the day, since you don't mention the day in the previous sentence
  •  Done - TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "At 0600 UTC the following day, the JMA determined that Nanmadol had transitioned into an extratropical cyclone after passing Taiwan." - so, the lede said Nanmadol was the only December tropical cyclone to strike Taiwan, but this implies that it was extratropical... or was it tropical when it struck? Where/when did it strike? Why did you skip such an important statement?! And I also notice you use GP, which uses operational data. Did the record hold for post-analysis? And is it based on JTWC or JMA?
  •  Done - Record held for JMA, which maintained tropical status for Nanmadol as it tracked over Taiwan. JTWC did not classify system as a tropical cyclone at the time. Added a few details. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "that later tracked in Japan" - I don't think "in" is the appropriate word here. Why not "over"?
  •  Done - TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Propeller aircraft were in particular grounded" - why "in particular"?
  •  Done - A bit badly worded, so I changed a few things. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Philippines president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo" - you should add "then-" somewhere, as Arroyo is no longer president
  •  Done - TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Tropical Storm Merbok, and Tropical Depression Merbok" - was one supposed to be Winnie?
  •  Done - Yep :P. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• Any wind reports in Philippines?
  • ✗ Not done - Not that I know of. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "The heavy rains greatly increased the probability of mudslides in the county" - were there any?
  •  Done - I figured it was a way to get 'people were forced to stay vigilant against mudslides' but I now figure that that statement is useless in an article. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "A station in Shishikui, Tokushima received 269 mm (10.6 in) was the maximum documented in the country. " - grammar
  •  Done - And bad grammar fixed. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "Maximum sustained winds clocked at 88 km/h (55 mph) in Chiba, Chiba and Ojima, Tokyo broke records for the month of December." - grammar? Were those three cities all in Tokyo, and you forgot the serial comma? I'm kinda confused.
  •  Done - No, it's Chiba, Chiba and Ojima, Tokyo :P TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
• "this gust broke the record for the strongest gust recorded in the city at any point of the year" - you should clarify the ending as "recorded in the city in 2004"
  •  Done - Changed to 'since record-keeping began' since that was the point. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

All in all, pretty good article! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:03, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review ! TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)