Talk:Typhoon Forrest (1983)

Typhoon Forrest (1983) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: December 24, 2013. (Reviewed version).

Weather: Tropical / Western Pacific Mid‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific typhoon work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Forrest (1983)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 04:43, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Super Typhoon Forrest was a powerful super typhoon that affected Japan" - kinda obvious. Maybe cut the first "super"? Also, don't include "that" in the pipe for the link
- Better? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Nah, you still say "Super typhoon" twice. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Whoops, removed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 05:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Typhoon Forrest formed from a tropical disturbance far from land. " - in the south pole? On the moon?
- Inside WPTC :P Jk, clarified :P YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe clarify western Pacific? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sure. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 05:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
" and thereafter, began to intensify." - cut comma
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
You should mention Forrest's rate of strengthening in the lede
- Noted. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Forrest then moved north impaling the elongated Japanese archipelago before transitioning into an extratropical cyclone on September 28." - love the "impaling" use here, but add a comma
- Added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd love to see a sentence mentioning the homeless, destroyed houses, and damaged houses. Try reorganizing the end of the lede to achieve this.
- All of what you said was there, but now there in the same sentence. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Ponope" - what is this? Pohnpei? Add a date too
- Fixed, and added a dated. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - Did you? It's still a redlink. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Not anymore. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 05:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"though none of them was able" - grammar. "was" should be "were"
- Good call. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If the JMA said it was a TD on the 19th, then that should be the formation date in the infobox
- Blame JG. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What was Forrest's peak from JMA? It's contradictory between the infobox and the prose of the MH
- Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Add something about the record intensification
- Record??? That honor goes to Wilma. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - Yea, and if Forrest held the record for 22 years, that deserves mentioning. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Hmm, reading this, no proof that Forrest was in that category. does not report Forrest's pressure acurretly. This gives some insight on why. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 05:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What allowed for Forrest's rapid intensification?
- Idk, but noted a formation of an eye. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Try finding out more. Check AMS? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Added a tidbit. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 05:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"By this time, Forrest was moving northwest" - as opposed to before? It looks like Forrest always traveled to the northwest
- There was a brief WNW turn in there apparently if you look closely. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What happened after JTWC discontinued advisories? Did it stay south of Shikoka? (and what is that?)
- Added and that is a place on earth. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
" Okinwana" - watch for typos. In general, the article needs a good copyedit
- Still not use to spelling Japanese names. Fixed though. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"resulting in a swath of 91 m (299 ft)" - width or length?
- Width. Tweaked the wording slightly here as it needed a copyedit. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - The grammar is worse here now. Please fix. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Better now? Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 05:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"26 people were hurt, including some serious" --> "some seriously" for the last part
- Tweaked. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
" that was considered "safe typhoon heaven"." - by whom?
- The JTWC. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Throughout the island of Okinawa, 30 sustained minor injuries and 20 homes would either damaged or destroyed. About 160,000 customers lost power" - this should be mentioned when you say the Okinawa impact
- Never occurred to me for some reason. Overrides a few of the JTWC stuff for the island. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Seven flights were called off, stranding 27,000 persons" so each flight carried 3,857 people?
- No, but 27,000 ppl were stranded all together. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - Yea, but you only mention seven flights being canceled, so how is this possible? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - "Seven flights were called off and 27,000 air travelers were stranded." does this work? Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:49, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All in all, it's an OK article, but some work is needed. I'll leave it on hold now. When you address these comments, I'll read through again. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the review Hink. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a little bit of information that can be obtained from the Mariners Weather Log Volume 28 Issue 1 Winter 1984 on Pg 37-38, including what happened once the system moved into the scary place called the Eastern Pacific ocean. Also there is a nice little tidbit on pg 45 about a boat that weathered the storm.Jason Rees (talk) 06:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't have access to this MWL at this time unfortunately. My hard drive crashed backed in July and I lost most of the documents I had, including some of my my MWL stuff. Obviously, DR's skydrive does not have them on anymore. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:49, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Do you need the MWL document? I still think that's needed. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:49, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Im surprised by the lack of information in this article about China, Korea or Taiwan - If you can you should ask a chinese editor to roughly translate this from the CWB. Also maybe include the storm rainfall total.Jason Rees (talk) 06:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not working via Google Translate. This is however. Although there does not appear to be anything major missing, just some rainfall totals. Ill try and get in touch with someone today, but you should remember that they are several different dialects of Chinese. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:49, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we need to add a sub-section on the Rapid Intensification since there can be no doubt that the 100 mb pressure drop was considered to be a world record by the WMO.Jason Rees (talk) 06:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- BTW, that's not from the WMO website, that's from Arizona State University's. And that uses data not reported on from the JMA and JTWC. I did mention it in the article though. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 13:49, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - 1) I realize its ASU's website and not the WMO website, but its still the WMO's record keeping site as proven by this press release from the WMO. 2) More importantly after following the click through links i arrived back at NOAA's FAQ which sources the data back to Roger Edson who just so happens to be one of the honourable mentions in this journal by Karl Hoarau which is where the pressure originally came from and is based on JTWC data.Jason Rees (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - HRD further backs it up. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - You know, I have it noted in the article already. That journal he was talking about was in the article already :P Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:49, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice for the impact to have a bit more structure imo.Jason Rees (talk) 06:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yellow Evan, ping? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:38, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, everything looks good, on second review. I checked the MWL, and there was nothing. Happy to pass now! --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:38, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Drop the year?

@Hurricanehink and Yellow Evan: - Since 1986 was a fishspinner and 1992 was a cyclone at peak - should we drop the year here?.Jason Rees (talk) 00:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this one on its own is quite notable enough for the main article. Usually in the WPTC, we only drop the year when it's much, much more notable than any others, like Vera and Tip. Not sure this is at that level. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, it's not retired and not particularly notable, no need to drop the year. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 17:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]