Talk:Typhoon Andy (1982)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Secret (talk · contribs) 19:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this article this weekend. Thanks Secret ^account 19:13, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"The system became a strong typhoon for a prolonged period on July 27 and July 28 while attaining a peak intensity of 185 km/h (115 mph) before striking southern Taiwan." When did it struck southern Taiwan, also reads of a bit like a run-on sentence, commas are your friend you know
- It is now two sentences. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Continuing westward through the Formosa Strait, the storm made its final landfall in southern China and dissipated in southeast China on July 30" Did it dissipate the same day? Mention it
- Added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"At least 60 fishing boats in harbors were badly damaged or wrecked in the wind." How can something get "wrecked in the wind" just say destroyed.
- "wrecked due to strong winds" is what I put; I seldom find that boats are destroyed in hurricane articles. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Power lines were damaged in 600 places; consequently, nearly a quarter of Twain residents lost power at the height of the storm. Wikilink Twain or did you meant Taiwan? Also the first sentence can use rephasing, like Power lines were down in 600 locations or another tweak in wording as it sounds like a one powerline went down 600 times.
- Yeah, Mark Twain was affected by the system. Jk. I meant Taiwan. I don't have a problem with the first part, giving I said "power lines", not "power line". Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The westernmost of the three drifted westward and remained poorly defined." Is it relevant if it never became a storm?
- Well, it was the only one of 3 not to, so yea, I think it is worth a mention. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Thereafter, Andy turned west and entered a more conductive environment for deepening" - Lost in meaning there.
- I'm lost in the meaning of your comment :P Ok, srsly, is it better now? Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"and during morning hours of July 28" - missing word
- Yep, better. It was the 26th, not the 28th FTR. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
any mentions of "passed away" should be replaced with died per WP:MOS
- Very good call, though I don't agree with the MOS there, I changed it. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Three "huge" waves struck the shoreline near Umatac, destroying several homes off of their foundation." - I don't think "destroying" is the right word for this.
- Changed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Along many nearby villages, Scattered damage was noted." - really on the grammar?
- Wtf, did I write this? Changed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Coastal area were hardest hit. - I'm sure you meant Coastal "areas"...
- Yes, I did, corrected. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lead said 600 "power lines" were damaged while body states 300 power poles without any mention of lines, be consistent.
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"including a man and a women which died" should be "including a man and woman who died"
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"Another 11-year-old boy was swept into the sea after presumed to have perished" ????
- Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"a 23-man crew was forced to abandon a 5,393 short tons" of what?
- Added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Overall, no major damage damage was observed" - next time please copyedit the article before reviewing
- Uhhh, really what is happening to me? This is frustrating, but fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Outside these pathetic prose mistakes, this is a well-done article. No close paraphrasing concerns, images are free of use, a random check of three citations correctly link the information. Thanks Secret ^account 01:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks for the review. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow that was quick, good enough, passing. Secret ^account 02:29, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]