Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Typhoon Gay (1992)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 23:15, 6 January 2012 [1].

Typhoon Gay (1992)[edit]

Typhoon Gay (1992) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it could be a good candidate for April Fools. Something like - "A gay typhoon blew saltwater to turn plants brown, curiously ignoring gymnosperms." The article got a thorough copyedit from User:Hylian Auree, and since the storm primarily affected English-speaking areas, I'm confident the article is comprehensive. It was a rather interesting gay typhoon that was considered by one agency to have been the second strongest typhoon in the world! So, gay things can be powerful. I am not gay-bashing by any means; quite the contrary, I'm supporting my community. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I'm more than satisfied with the article's condition, though I have just one inquiry. Can't you merge one of the paragraphs in the "aftermath" section? HurricaneFan25 — 17:03, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:30, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Multi-page PDFs need page numbers
  • Be consistent in how newspaper sources are notated
  • I couldn't get FN 10 to open - can you verify the URL and add volume/issue numbers? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:30, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Alright, Tito and I added the page numbers. I checked the newspaper sources, and I thought they were all formatted the same. That ref #10 should be fixed now. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, some minor quibbles, though:

  • For most of its existence, Tropical Storm Gay maintained a general west to west-northwest track to the south of a strong anticyclone. — while true, this sentence de-emphasizes the influence of the anticyclone. I'd say, "For most of its existence, Tropical Storm Gay was generally steered to the west or west-northwest by a strong anticyclone located north of the storm" or something similar.
  • The JTWC upgraded it to typhoon status early on November 17, — we have an article on typhoons. Use it. (Read: add a link here for us people who don't believe that there are hurricanes in the Pacific…)
  • With favorable sea surface temperatures and upper-level wind pattern, — wind patterns, to maintain consistency in the plurals
  • On November 19, the JTWC upgraded Gay to a super typhoon, which is a typhoon with 1-minute sustained winds of 240 km/h — link to super typhoon (it's an anchored redirect) and remove the link to typhoon, since you placed it in a sentence above.
  • Gradual intensification continued, and based on satellite estimates, — link to Dvorak technique
  • In the 24 hours after peak intensity, the JTWC estimated that the winds decreased by 65 km/h (40 mph) to below super typhoon status; — I'd say "In the 24 hours after Gay reached its peak intensity," as the whole sentence is missing an antecedent.
  • … the typhoon maintained a large size, with a wind diameter of 1,480 km (920 mi) — Is this the radius of maximum wind, or something else?
  • Gay made landfall on Guam, becoming the third typhoon in three months to strike the island; the others were Typhoon Omar in August and Typhoon Brian in October.[3] — an em dash would work better than a semicolon there
  • While becoming extratropical, Gay affected Okinawa Prefecture with heavy rainfall — link to Extratropical cyclone#Extratropical transition here
Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! I forgot we had links to some of those things. I believe I addressed all of that. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Auree (talk)

Comment on prose from Hylian Auree (talk)
  • "While moving to the west, Gay steadily intensified and moved through the Marshall Islands as an intensifying typhoon." – a bit of redundancy here
  • "Typhoon Gay" – You've previously used just "Gay" and we know it's a typhoon by now, so change to "Gay"
    • I changed some, left others. I think it works in some places for sentence variety. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:10, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The typhoon briefly re-intensified, although it weakened as it turned toward Japan and became extratropical on November 29" – it weakened as it
    • Changed first. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:10, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Now you have three different ways to refer to the same subject in one double-clause sentence. What I meant was, try rejigging that sentence so that you only have two subjects for each clause ("The typhoon" and "it"). Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The nation's capital of Majuro lost power during the storm and experienced power and water outages." – redundancy
  • "Due to its substantial weakening, the typhoon had a disrupted inner-core that dropped minimal rainfall, which caused extensive defoliation of plants due to salt water scorching." – verbose yet vague
    • I split the sentences. I disagree that it is vague. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • It is vague in that readers won't know what a disrupted core and little rainfall have to do with defoliation due to saltwater scorching. An important factor is missing (the winds), and even then it might not be clear how "little rainfall" contributes to the whole. Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Later in its duration" – can we reword this?
More later. Auree ★ 22:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Furthering source review - also done spotchecks on sources with formatting problems. Auree ★ 00:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 1: Where did you get the document date (1992-12-25) from?
    • The JMA, as cited. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)-[reply]
      • I can't find any evidence that this is the publish date in the document cited, nor in the directory leading to it. Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • The publication date is on the BT itself - coded as 19921225 aka 1992-12-25.Jason Rees (talk) 05:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • That isn't the publication date of the data list being cited, though. That's just when Gay's bit was edited in. I'd remove the date altogether since a best track is a list of data that is continuously updated. Auree ★ 05:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Isn't that valuable though? That's when the data was created. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs 3, 4, 13, and 15 (possibly others as well) need cite report templates
    • Is there any difference between making them cite web or cite report? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is, for validity and accuracy. It is a report by an official body issued online after all, not just a simple cite to a website. For more information, please see here Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 4: Nitpicking, but replace the hyphen in the title with an en dash
  • Newspaper sources need cite news templates
  • Ref 8: Check publisher and author field. Also, you add a location for the publisher here; this needs to be consistent with the rest of the article (I suggest removing it)
    • There is no author listed, and the agency is fine. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • You are quite right, my mistake. Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 10: Publisher/page numbers?
    • Page numbers are already included. I added the publisher, however. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oh, it's because it should be "pages=" in the editing window (it is a range after all) and the range should also be notated with an ndash instead of a hyphen. Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 11: surely this is inadequately formatted. It is a book (needs cite book template), so publisher and chapter fields are required
    • Converted. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Page number is just 37, not 5-37. The 5 before the page number stands for the chapter number, which also needs to be notated using the chapter field and the appropriate title. Publisher should be URS Corporation, while author can be Guam Office of Civil Defense. Title also needs to be rechecked. Auree ★ 21:51, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done all of that, and I added "2011" to the title. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna stop for now. Citations need a lot more accuracy in how they are formatted. The above sources do back up their claims accurately without close paraphrasing or copyvio, however. Auree ★ 23:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)}}[reply]
  • Support Note on all of criteria 1, 2, and 4 - continued the citation review offsite with Hink and gave the article a quick copy edit—please check my changes. I could only discern one problem while spotchecking (ref 14), which I have relayed to the editor and will be an easy fix has been fixed now, all okay. Good work on this article! Auree ★ 03:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Power to the gays! I was born when this one came and went. Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 03:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: You didn't including the specific page number(s) for Reference 10; "Tinian island" - shouldn't that be "Tinian Island"? Otherwise, I will support this nomination.--12george1 (talk) 17:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The above comments corrected anything I had a problem with. Tango16 (talk) 18:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We still need an image review here. Ucucha (talk) 11:28, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Two of the source links for File:Whole_world_-_land_and_oceans.jpg return "Page not found" errors
  • Tracking data link for File:Gay_1992_track.png doesn't seem to be working. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: This article is well-written and got everything. Jeffrey Gu| Cyclone 21:36, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notes
  • There's something amiss in this citation:
  • 4. ^ (PDF) Annual Report on Activities of the RSMC Tokyo – Typhoon Center 2000 (Report). Japan Meteorological Organization. February 2001. p. 3. Retrieved 2011-11-21.
  • When you click back from the citation to the text, it goes nowhere (something goofed up with the cite ref tag?) Could you figure out what's amiss, and see if it's occurring elsewhere? Also, I see no one has yet fixed the blooming cite report template which, as I pointed out on Auree's last FAC, puts the PDF for some reason first instead of later as in other cite templates. It's not your problem, but I've posted a query to the CITET page,[2] and it would be good if you hurricane folk would follow there and help get that fixed so you can have consistent citations.
  • Hey Sandy, thanks for dropping by. I'm not sure I understand your first inquiry (everything seems to work fine for me). Maybe I'm not interpreting something correctly? As for the second problem, it is quite irritating. It seems to do this only when there is no author field; when an author field is applied it formats it the way as it does with ref 17 (which in this case uses the |type= parameter). This still places the PDF differently from the other citations but aesthetically it looks less disruptive. I've tried adding those parameters ("type=Report") to the other citations but without success, confirming that it has to do with the lack of an author field. Will keep an eye on the discussion on there. Auree ★ 20:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's hard to explain the first problem, but I'll try. When you click on a citation with the article, it takes you to that citation at the bottom of the article. You should be able to click back (to the text) by hitting the carat in front of the citation. Neither is the four showing up in the text, nor can you click back to the text from the four. Perhaps someone will come along who can understand what I'm saying ... it's weird. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:08, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The citation is referred to in the second of the "Notes". When I click on the ^, it takes me back up there; perhaps the screen doesn't move for you because you have a wider screen. Ucucha (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same here. I tried this in a narrow screen and it works for me the way it should. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, now I see. I third what Ucucha and Tito have said--brings me to the ref for note #2. Auree ★ 22:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, ha! Solved then, thanks. Still need to resolve the international designation-- watching WP:ERRORS lately has given me a greater appreciation for how Dabomb87 gets clobbered if he puts anything in a TFA blurb that isn't completely clear, so we need to get our leads as good as they can get. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, by saying "other storms with the same name", you are basically saying what Sandy suggested (since, after all, it is named "Typhoon Gay"). How about "Other storms named Gay"? Auree ★ 21:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    • Good catch! I never thought about that before. I changed it to the more proper term of JMA designation. Do you think it should be linked there? I don't want to do Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) designation, since that's a lot to carry in the first sentence of the whole article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:13, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about just changing it to "designation code", would that make any sense? I'm not familiar with the terminology for typhoons and their naming, but I know it would be much clearer than "JMA designation" or "international designation". Auree ★ 21:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think that'd make much sense. I think "JMA designation" makes sense though, since that is what that agency called it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, that'd introduce a new problem. Readers won't know what "JMA" stands for until they read further into the article... and that isn't how it's supposed to be. What else would you call "9230"? Per definition, I would call that a code or a number. Auree ★ 21:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, it says "JMA" at the top-right of the page. I think "code" seems weird. JMA does call it "International number ID". --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This probably can get resolved by linking the "international designator" to Tropical cyclone naming#Western Pacific, and explain there what the number actually is. Otherwise you would introduce a long, clumsy explanation in the first sentence of the article—the place that needs it the least. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 22:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Typhoon_Gay_(1992)/archive1&oldid=1136094970"