Talk:Typhoon Dan (1989)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: maclean (talk) 04:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see Wikipedia:What is a good article?)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Two images: both WPCommons hosted, both public domain
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

"1-minute maximum sustained winds of 130 km/h (80 mph).[1] The JMA indicates that Dan peaked slightly afterward, with 10-minute sustained winds of 140 km/h (85 mph)" - isn't the 1-minute maximum sustained wind supposed to be higher than the 10-minute sustained wind? Which number at [1] records this wind measurement?

"89101212 002 5 168 1113 960 075 90090 0090 90300 0300" – 075 = 75 knots = 85 mph, and the JMA uses 10-minute winds by default. In theory, 1-minute winds should be greater than 10-minute winds, but since they're recorded by different agencies, they don't always coincide. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 3 = National Disaster Coordinating Council. - does National refer to the Philippines? Perhaps the |location= parameter would be appropriate here.

Not sure actually. Here's their main home page, but it doesn't mention any location in particular... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it is the Philippines. I added the parameter: [2] maclean (talk) 02:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks both! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]