Talk:Typhoon Halola

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Typhoon Halola article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Typhoon Halola 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.

Typhoon Halola is part of the 2015 Pacific hurricane season series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 6, 2020	Good article nominee	Listed
June 8, 2019	Good topic candidate	Not promoted
March 16, 2020	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Weather: Tropical / Eastern Pacific / Western Pacific Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific hurricane work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific typhoon work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article has been assessed by editors of the WikiProject.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 16:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

that traversed the Pacific Ocean along a 7,640 km (4,750 mi) long path. --> "that traversed 7,640 km... of the Pacific Ocean". I felt like this wording could've been improved, so as to avoid "along" and "long" in the same sentence.
- Changed to your recommendation, but IMO it still sounds a bit strange. I may change it again later. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay, I changed it to "traveled 7,640 km (4,750 mi) across the Pacific Ocean". Hopefully this sounds better. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 11:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
" On July 6, a low-level circulation that had developed a few days prior began increasing in organization. " - this threw me off by saying that the circulation developed a few days prior. You said in the previous sentence that the trough moved into the CPAC on 7/5. Do you have a definitive start to the storm?
- Reworked this part - didn't notice that TCR mentioned the circulation formed on July 3. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Parts of the MH are heavy on jargon. This part felt a bit wonky - "A weakening trend soon followed as wind shear increased once again and a tropical upper tropospheric trough that had been aiding outflow began to dissipate."
- I tried cutting down on some of the jargon, including removing mentions of TUTTs and replacing some of the technical terms. I'm not sure how much more I can cut without compromising factual accuracy. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
in the third MH paragraph, you say "Vertical wind shear", as opposed to regular wind shear, or easterly wind shear. I think you could get away with each time just saying "wind shear"
- Fixed. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Could you mention Halola's path through the Ryukyus in the MH? You talk a lot about its fluctuations in intensity, and then suddenly the landfall in Japan.
- Added more info. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article is in really good shape, so there wasn't a whole lot to point out. Let me know if you have any questions about my comments, but I think it should be easy to address. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]