Jump to content

Talk:Meteorological history of Cyclone Freddy/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Nominator: HurricaneEdgar (talk · contribs) 10:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 03:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hi HurricaneEdgar (talk · contribs), happy to review this!

Lead
  • I think the first sentence should focus just on the longevity record. If anything is the second-most or the most of anything, then the most is probably the more interesting stat.
checkY Fixing
  • "It also had the most accumulated cyclone energy of any individual cyclone and is the only known tropical cyclone to have achieved seven separate rapid intensification cycles." - you should probably explain what ACE is considering it's the first time you mentioned the term. The seven rapid intensification cycles could be mentioned in the narrative of the storm, such as the first time Freddy did it, saying something like "the first of a record seven rapid intensification cycles throughout its duration".
checkY Fixing.
  • How come you got rid of ACE? You also got rid of the seven rapid intensification cycles. I didn't say get rid of it from the lead, just to integrate it into the prose a bit better. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The cyclone was the fourth named storm and the second very intense tropical cyclones of the 2022–23 Australian region and South-West Indian Ocean cyclone seasons." - when you mention it being the fourth named storm, that's when you should mention the date, since at this point it's the first reference to the year, and there still hasn't even been a reference to the time of year. Be sure to add that somewhere in the first paragraph. I suggest you completely rewrite/reorder the lead so instead of the first paragraph listing every record, instead it's more of an introduction to Freddy and its meteorological history
checkY Done. HurricaneEdgar 08:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should add the general area where it formed
checkY Done.
  • "The United States Joint Typhoon Warning Center estimated Freddy's peak strength, equivalent to Category 5 hurricane on the Saffir–Simpson scale with peak winds of 270 km/h (165 mph)." - when? Also, what was the basis for the intensity estimate?
checkY Deleted, It's unclear why the category 5 hurricane is mentioned in the lead, given that it highlights the peak from MFR. HurricaneEdgar 08:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I don't think it was unreasonable to have it in the lead. They're just another forecast center. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
checkY linked
  • There isn't much meteorological history in the lead, such as what allowed it to last so long, what caused it to take the track that it did, and even basic stuff like how long it was at peak intensity, or its intensity fluctuations (other than seven rapid intensification cycles)
checkY Fixing.
You didn't add much about the MH. Why did it track as long as it did? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Freddy first made landfall near Mananjary, Madagascar." - when? How strong?
checkY add tropical cyclone
Wait what Category is this? You previously used Category 4 on the AUS scale, so I'm guessing that one? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Soon after, Freddy made its second landfall just south of Vilankulos, Mozambique, where it began to regain tropical characteristics upon re-emerging into the channel and subsequently intensified into tropical cyclone status. " - that's a lot for one sentence, should definitely be split up. Also, "soon" doesn't exactly mean "three days" which is how long it actually took. How much stronger did it get in the Moz Channel?
checkY clarified.
This should be expanded further. "Upon re-emerging into the channel, it began to regain tropical characteristics and subsequently intensified into a tropical cyclone status just before making a final landfall near Quelimane, Mozambique, on 11 March. " - this is unusual and should be expanded, since this is arguably what allowed Freddy to become the longest lasting TC. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Catastrophic flooding and extensive wind damage ensued, resulting in 1,434 fatalities across its path in Southern Africa, making it the third-deadliest tropical cyclone recorded in the Southern Hemisphere, only behind 2019's Cyclone Idai and the 1973 Flores cyclone." - none of this is sourced or reflected in the article.
checkY Remove.
Formation and intensification
  • "An active phrase of the Madden–Julian oscillation in conjunction with an equatorial Rossby wave led to the formation of a tropical low on 5 February." - where?
checkY clarified.
  • Why the "However" in the second sentence?
checkY deleted.
  • "Given the increase in organization, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM)[nb 2] stated that the tropical low had strengthened into a Category 1 tropical cyclone on the Australian tropical cyclone intensity scale and was given the name Freddy." - when?
checkY add the UTC.
checkY linked.
  • "As the storm moved away from the Australian region" - what do you mean by Australian region? When I hear region, I think of the entire basin, but it didn't leave the basin for a few more days.
checkY clarify.
  • "As a result, it was classified as a Category 2 hurricane on the Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale by the JTWC." - the JTWC doesn't use the SSHS like this. Cat 2 equivalent would work, or you could just list their estimated peak intensity? Same thing when you later say "and upgraded the system to a Category 4 hurricane"
checkY change.
But you still need to mention the SSHS, not just link it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the system became increasingly disorganized, with the increase in wind shear" - could you increase the variety of the words in this sentence? (couldn't resist, sorry :P )
checkY copy edit.
  • "The BoM reported that Freddy peaked in the Australian region as a high-end Category 4 severe tropical cyclone" - whoa that's whiplash considering the previous sentence just said that Freddy weakened back into a minimal tropical storm. What happened? Try having more a smooth transition
checkY clarify.
  • " At the same time" - when? The last date reference was February 7th, when apparently it weakened into a tropical storm, but I have no idea when it restrengthened, or how
checkY clarify.
  • "By that time, the eyewall had cloud tops colder than −130 °F (−90 °C)" - this is the first reference to the storm's structure in several days. Could you please add more detail?
checkY deleted.
Whoa I said add detail, not delete! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Over the following days, the cyclone's structure gradually became disorganized, with its eye no longer well-defined by 12 February." - why?
checkY clarify.
But why did it weaken this time? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Peak intensity
  • First off, the section covers a lot more than the storm's peak intensity
  • "The JTWC, meanwhile, assessed that Freddy had peaked with sustained wind speeds of 270 km/h (165 mph)" - there's no transition into this section, so the "meanwhile" has almost no reference point. And similar to earlier, on what basis was this estimate? What was the storm structure like?
checkY Remove.
That isn't solving the issue by you removing stuff, especially when I'm asking for more detail. You should have the JTWC peak winds (don't know why you removed them), and add the basis for the wind estimate, probably something like the Dvorak technique using satellite imagery. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why the mention of Winston? Completely different storm and basin
checkY Delete, I acknowledge that Winston and Fantala were the same, not connected to Freddy. HurricaneEdgar 08:50, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • " This made Freddy the one and only five tropical cyclones with Category 5 hurricane during the month of February." - again, Freddy wasn't a Category 5 hurricane. Do you mean Category 5 on the Australian cyclone scale? Also, the grammar is awkward.
checkY Remove.
  • " Freddy strengthened further to its peak intensity as a very intense tropical cyclones on the MFR's scale" - grammar
checkY Fixing.
  • "Shortly afterward, Freddy passed north of Mauritius and Réunion, where it weakened to an intense tropical cyclones" - grammar is also awkward here. Also, why did it weaken? And when was the "shortly afterward"? There isn't a single reference to the date by this point of the section
checkY Fixing.
But you didn't fix it - how did it weaken here? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Freddy officially made landfall as a tropical cyclone status near Mananjary, Madagascar at 21:00 UTC on 21 February, with 10-minute sustained winds of 130 km/h (80 mph) and a minimum central pressure of 970 hPa (28.64 inHg)" - why the "officially"? Also, what was the storm structure by the time of landfall?
checkY remove officially.
Not done. "with reaching winds about 175 km/h (110 mph) on 21 February" - this is awkward. Also, was the storm still weakening when it made landfall, or was it holding steady? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Once Freddy had moved inland, it began to traverse the mountainous terrain of Madagascar, was downgraded to overland depression status, and entered the Mozambique Channel." - this is too much for one sentence. Try expanding it so the grammar flows better.
checkY Copyedit.
But you removed information again, that it was downgraded to overland depression status. Please add that back in. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Freddy attained moderate tropical storm status while in the Mozambique Channel." when?
checkY copyedit.
  • I take it the conditions were favorable in the Mozambique Channel so it could reintensify both times? Warm waters?
checkY added.
  • The third paragraph of "Peak intensity" is all about "Records", most of which deal with the storm's entire history. That section needs to be moved.
checkY Moved.
Demise
  • How did Freddy turn around? Were there any signs that the storm would move back over water?
checkY Add MFR predicted
I want to push a bit further. Why did they anticipate this? What was the steering mechanism? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "With increased convection in the eastern semicircle, Freddy re-intensified off the coast of Mozambique, achieving tropical disturbance status.[42] As Freddy showed signs of intensification, the MFR upgraded the system to a tropical depression status" - when for both events?
checkY Fixing.
  • "Continuing to intensify, Freddy began to exhibit an ill-defined eye on visible satellite imagery, leading to its classification as a tropical cyclone status with 10-sustained winds of 150 km/h (90 mph)" - was this all one event at the same time? Or did this happen at different times? Who classified it as tropical cyclone status? Also the grammar is awkward here.
checkY Copyedit.
  • Ref 52 doesn't cover that information. It's MFR, not the JTWC you quoted.
checkY Delete.
  • "Within two hours, the eye vanished from satellite imagery and then dissipated soon thereafter, late on 14 March." - this says the eye dissipated late on March 14. But the infobox said the storm dissipated on March 14. You need to be clearer what's happening, and when.
checkY Copyedit.

So that's my review. There are a lot of issues, but I don't think it's impossible to fix. Please let me know if you have any questions, HurricaneEdgar (talk · contribs). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) All issues have been addressed, with additional information added. HurricaneEdgar 14:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Further
  • "Originating from a Madden–Julian oscillation in conjunction with an equatorial Rossby wave," - I'm not sure what this means.
checkY see above.
  • "approximately 401 km (250 mi) " - this isn't approximate. Check other units.
checkY fixing
  • "which immediately classified it as a tropical cyclone status before later upgraded the system to an intense tropical cyclone status" - the grammar is weird here
checkY copyedit.
  • What was the minimum pressure? 927, as indicated in prose, or the 918 as indicated in the infobox?
checkY clarify.
  • "The system subsequently passed north of the Mascarene Islands as it turned west-southwestward" - how far north of the islands?
checkY copyedit.
  • The "Demise" section is misleading since it redeveloped
checkY changing.
  • You go from saying the storm was moving eastward toward Madagascar, and then it made landfall on Mozambique. Again, when did it change its course, and why?
checkY add a bit info.

I had to reply to a bunch of your "fixes". Several times you removed valid information, and other times I'd like just a bit more than what's currently there. The article is certainly headed in the right direction, HurricaneEdgar. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you've done a lot of edits. I just wanted to check how you're doing, HurricaneEdgar? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've almost finished the article, but now I need to ensure the references are accurate. All other issues have been addressed. The article has already been expanded using information from the BoM, MFR, and JTWC. I think it could pass in GAN? I'm happy to fix it if there are problems in the articles. :) HurricaneEdgar 07:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yea unfortunately with all of the edits you've made (seems like you've made hundreds of edits), you might've introduced some new issues, or missed some of my previous comments.

  • The first sentence should really just focus on the longevity record. Most people don't know what ACE is, so that should be its own sentence, along with an explanation of what ACE is.
checkY.
  • "the fourth tropical cyclones of the 2023–24 Australian region cyclone season" - grammar
checkY reword.
  • Link named when you mention the BOM naming Freddy.
checkY Already added
  • You never mentioned the direction of movement in the first lead paragraph
checkY Another editor has already done it.
  • Be sure to include 10-min vs 1-min winds
checkY.
  • "After briefly weakening from its peak intensity, the cyclone moved across the northern Mascarene Islands." - "across"? That's not accurate, Freddy never struck Reunion or Mauritius.
checkY reword.
  • "An active phrase of the Madden–Julian oscillation in conjunction with an equatorial Rossby wave led to the formation of a tropical low—identified as 13U—on 4 February 2023, when it was situated to the south of the Indonesian archipelago" - while accurate, this is a lot for the first sentence. I suggest start with something like "The origins of Cyclone Freddy were..." Otherwise this sentence is going to turn away readers because of its usage of jargon (MJO and Rossby wave)
checkY rephase.
  • "roughly 401 mi (645 km) north-northwest" - I mentioned this issue earlier, that your units weren't rounded. Also, miles shouldn't be first since the storm primarily affected metric-using countries.
checkY Delete. I think it would be better if we didn't include that.
  • "As the storm moved away from the Australian basin" - this was a week before the storm left the basin. Please reword
checkY reword.
  • "As the day progressed" - this is a poor way to start a paragraph, because there's no day reference when the paragraph starts. I suggest something like "After its first peak"
checkY reword.
  • After the first bout of wind shear on Feb 9th, did that decrease for Freddy's reintensification on the 11th? Sorry to be picky, but the narrative doesn't make sense if you mention wind shear being a negative factor, but then don't mention what allowed the restrengthening
checkY I added some information on why it weakened and then reintensified.
  • "Cyclone Freddy acquired annular characteristics" when
checkY Another editor has already done it.
  • "10 mi (16 km)" - km should be first
checkY.
  • Not done. You changed it from 10 mi to 10 km. Also, can you check if ref 15 works? It didn't work for me, but the archived url said 10 nmi eye. That's 11.5 mi (18.5 km), so this is wrong here. Please fix. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reference URLs I checked indicate 10 nautical miles. HurricaneEdgar 09:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://wiki.chlod.net/jtwc/prog/2023-02-15-0300-sh1123prog.txt HurricaneEdgar 10:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Freddy then underwent a steady weakening trend due to cooling sea surface and cloud top temperatures." - similar issue as before. You mentioned the weakening trend, which is good, but you don't mention what allowed the subsequent restrengthening. Was it a steady weakening trend if immediately after you mention the JTWC peak, with Freddy as a Cat 5?
checkY Delete.
  • " By 18:00 UTC that day, the cyclone made landfall near Mananjary, Madagascar, as a strong Category 2-equivalent intensity, with winds about 175 km/h (110 mph)" - this was a problem I mentioned earlier that you didn't fix. It's inconsistent how you handle Categories, since you deal with the AUS scale, plus the SSHS-equivalent. Since the JTWC doesn't use the SSHS, I suggest removing all category references to the SSHS, other than the Cat 5 peak, since Cat 4 equivalent doesn't really mean much of anything in this basin.
checkY Added JTWC estimated, deleted category.
  • "Propelled by a subtropical ridge to its south" - this is the first mention of a ridge. As I've said previously, you need to include the factors for why a storm moved the way it did, and I'm guessing that there was a ridge to its south at some point of Freddy's track. Right?
checkY reword.
  • Ref 33/34 doesn't back up the observation from Europa Island, does it?
checkY Replace "[1] to support observation.
  • "As early as 26 February, the MFR anticipated that the system would move back into the Mozambique Channel and redevelop into a tropical cyclogenesis" - why though? I've asked a few times for you to indicate the mechanism for why Freddy moved back over water. Check here
checkY Fixing the information.
  • Why did the storm turn back to the northwest in the Mozambique Channel after it was moving toward Madagascar?
checkY I added when it stormed and traveled through Madagascar.
  • Ref 51 doesn't cover the information
checkY Delete.
  • " as a strong Category 2-equivalent intensity at 03:00 UTC on 11 March, with winds of about 175 km/h (110 mph)" - Aus scale here or SSHS? If it's JTWC, you need to indicate the estimate was from JTWC. If it's from MFR, you don't always have to, since as the official RSMC, what they say is the official word, although it's useful to mention MFR intensities when you're dealing with three different warning centers.
checkY As mentioned above regarding Madagascar.
  • "And, late that same day, the system continued to travel northwards, bringing rain to Malawi and Mozambique." - you're not supposed to start a sentence with "And".
checkY Another editor has already done it.
  • Note 4 should probably be explained in prose, since that's one of the most important records Freddy set. A bit more detail would be good, like how much longer Freddy lasted than John.
checkY added.
  • Be sure to explain what ACE is in the record section.
checkY

Sorry to add a few more things, but there were a lot of issues that I brought up previously that weren't fixed. The article is surely getting better, but not quite there yet. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Argh, HurricaneEdgar (talk · contribs) you're killing me :P You keep saying things are fixed, but either you're not fixing them, or you're reintroducing mistakes:

  • "Located just within Tropical Cyclone Warning Centre Melbourne's area of responsibility, the storm was named Freddy—the third named storm of the 2023–24 Australian region cyclone season—by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology." - wrong season, it was 22-23 AUS season
checkY The fixing was already done by another editor.
  • I don't see any mentions of Freddy's westward track in the lead. I don't appreciate when you add a checkmark in the review, saying that someone else did it, when in fact it wasn't done. You should probably mention the storm's track in the AUS basin, being a partial loop, plus the steady westward track. If you need a source - the BoM has a writeup, which mentions that the ridge started being the steering mechanism as early as February 7th.
checkY The fixing was already done by another editor.
  • "The cyclone then made landfall as a strong Category 2-equivalent intensity with winds about 175 km/h (110 mph) near Mananjary, Madagascar on 21 February. " - you didn't include whether this was 1 or 10-min, and what scale this Category is.
checkY added.
  • "Upon re-emerging into the channel early on 1 March, it began to regain tropical characteristics—meandering along the Madagascar coast—and intensified into a below tropical cyclone just before making its final landfall with winds of about 175 km/h (110 mph) near Quelimane, Mozambique on 11 March." - too much for one sentence
checkY Rewrite.
  • You mention the Category-equivalent a lot, but you never once mention the Saffir-Simpson scale. Please add.
checkY add.

checkY Fixing.

  • "Late on 21 February, the cyclone developed a well-defined 6 mi (9.7 km) pinhole eye" - similar issue as earlier. You need metric first. Also, you converted wrongly. The original value was in nautical miles. 6 nautical miles is 7 miles, or 11 km.
checkY Fixing.
  • "By 18:00 UTC that day, the cyclone made landfall near Mananjary, Madagascar,[25] with the JTWC estimated winds of about 175 km/h (110 mph" - grammar
checkY Fixing.
  • "Why did the storm turn back to the northwest in the Mozambique Channel after it was moving toward Madagascar?" - I have to ask this again. You never said why it turned here.
  • The JTWC described the system as "a B-reel horror movie that never ends" and concluded, "I Am Legend,"[50] while meteorologists described it as "remarkable. - I said this before that the content wasn't covered in these references. Please fix, and don't just delete.
checkY Fixed. It was clarified that the statement was based on the forecast predicting the storm would return to the channel.
  • Note 4 should probably be explained in prose, since that's one of the most important records Freddy set. A bit more detail would be good, like how much longer Freddy lasted than John. I'm annoyed that I have to copy this issue again.
    checkY Fixed. I added the information on how much longer it took compared to John.
  • "Moreover, it achieved the highest accumulated cyclone energy, a metric used to measure tropical cyclone activity.[58] reaching an ACE of 87.01, equivalent to an average Atlantic hurricane season, and surpassing the previous record set by Hurricane Ioke in 2006." - Double check this, the grammar/syntax isn't right.
    checkY Fixed.
  • Also, you should not be using Guiness Book of World Records for the record. Use World Meteorological Organization ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
checkY replace.

So that's it. I really appreciate all of the edits, but it's not quite there yet. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking for an update, HurricaneEdgar (talk · contribs). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:15, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article seems to be ready to go for GA. I added a bit of information and addressed all the issues in the article. HurricaneEdgar 00:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Meteorological_history_of_Cyclone_Freddy/GA1&oldid=1237476693"