Talk:Tropical Storm Linda (1997)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take on this review. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 20:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 1 (clear/concise prose, spelling/grammar correct [a]; complies with MOS guides on lead, layout, W2W, fiction, and list incorporation)

Lead

"was the worst typhoon in Vietnam in at least 100 years" -> was a Pacific typhoon and the worst storm to hit Vietnam in at least 100 years?
- I like having a nice, concise opener. IDK, I do like the existing wording. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I suppose the reason why I don't feel comfortable with it is because, partially, it puts more emphasis on the fact that it hit Vietnam than the fact that it was a Pacific typhoon. Although the bulk of the attention went to its impact on Vietnam, it affected a wide variety of countries. IMHO, I feel that the sentence actually may fit better later in the paragraph. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:18, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, I certainly think Vietnam should get more emphasis. That's where nearly all of the deaths occurred. It's a nice, concise, strong opening sentence. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Alright, I'll take it, then. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 05:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Several countries around the world sent relief aid, including medical teams, food, and clothing, and ultimately the food supply and health status of the storm victims were not as bad as originally feared." - This sentence seems awkward to me. Do you mean they helped until the problem was alleviated, or that they came and found that the problem wasn't as bad as expected?
- I split it up. My bad, I have a habit of making sentences too long. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"killing at least 164 deaths." --> causing at least 164 deaths.
- Killing deaths makes no sense, hah! --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meteorological history

"Typhoon Forrest in 1992" - Wikilink Typhoon Forrest, if possible.
- Yea, I can handle that. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"weakness in the subtropical ridge" - Can you wikilink "subtropical ridge"?
- It is linked at the beginning of the meteorological history. Should it be linked again? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, I see. Don't worry about it, then. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Impact and aftermath

Ca Mau should be "Cà Mau".
Bac Lieu should be "Bạc Liêu".
Soc Trang should be "Sóc Trăng".
"Kien Giang should be "Kiên Giang".
- I got the above four. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, you only got three of them. :P You forgot about Cà Mau! --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:19, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - To clarify...there are a few other places where "Ca Mau" still exists. Your browser's find tool should find it with ease. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:23, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - Oops, now I got it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"purchased on Ho Chi Minh City." --> purchased in Ho Chi Minh City.
- Faw @ my word-o. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Ultimately, the food supply and health status of the storm victims were not as bad as originally feared." - As with the comment in the lead. Perhaps you should replace "ultimately" with "eventually"?
- I tweaked the wording. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"as well as the Vietnamese New Year." - the relevance of the Vietnamese New Year isn't clear. Is it possible to further explain it?
- That was my fault, I misinterpreted the source. I think it should be clearer now. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 2 (all info cited, inline refs and ref section used [a]; reliable sources cite challengeable info [b]; NOR [c])

You should probably mention somewhere in the inline ref that reference 3 (from the IMD) is a XLS spreadsheet.
- Ack, yea. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To be truer to reference 5, you should say that the region's inhabitants had either never experienced such a typhoon, and that those at sea were unable to avoid it instead of that it rarely experiences tropical cyclones.
- I'm finding it weird to do the first part (had never experienced such a typhoon). I think it's just easiest to say worst in 100 years. Simplicity is best. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You stated that 875 injuries were had by the time reference 8 was released. The ref says 857.
- --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)M'i cixelsyd m'I[reply]
"flooded 1,750 square miles (4,500 km²) of rice paddy crop" - I didn't find either number in reference 10.
- They are converted from the figure given. Hectares aren't that common of a measurement, so I changed it to something better-known. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification tidbit. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are a large number of statistics following reference 13, although none of them appear in reference 13. You should cite these with reference 14.
- Changed. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 3 (addresses all main aspects of topic [a]; well-focused [b])

Reference 16 discusses 10,600 Thai villagers who got sick because of flooding-related illnesses after Linda came through the area. It would be a good thing to note, but I won't hold GA because of this.
- Added :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you'd like, you can use reference 4 to note that Linda also pulled moisture away from areas in Indonesia where wildfires continued to rage. I won't hold back GA status if you choose not to add this.
- Added :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criterion 4 (no undue weight)

Looks fine here.

Criterion 5 (stable)

Stable is looks indeed.

Criterion 6 (images have copyright status; fair use images have rationales; images/captions relevant)

Looks good here.

Overall comments

The edit history tells me that you didn't do a great deal of work on this article. I must say, nice find! I'll put this on hold for a week or so to give you time to work on this, although I'm sure it won't take so long to patch up. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 22:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I did do most of the work. For a time, I edited under the name Viennaiswaiting to see what it was like being a new user and get a fresh new start. I'll get these issues in a minute. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:51, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I think that should do it! :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Almost...! You forgot to change "Ca Mau" into the Vietnamese spelling in a few places, and I also replied to your comment regarding the first sentence in the lead; I still don't feel so good about it. Otherwise, you've addressed everything else. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 07:30, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I won't push my lead concern any further. It won't affect the GA review, so no worries.

I'll pass the article momentarily. Congrats on another one. :) --Starstriker7^(Talk) 05:55, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]