Wikipedia:Peer review/Typhoon Xangsane/archive1

Typhoon Xangsane

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.

  All workable suggestions (in my opinion) from the automated review have been acted upon. TheCoffee (talk) 20:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is a Good Article, and I would like to see it become a Featured Article. There are two other typhoon FAs (Typhoon Pongsona and Typhoon Paka), and this one has roughly the same length and follows the same outline (meteorological history, preparations, impact, aftermath). Note that I didn't personally do any work on this article, just putting it up for peer review, and I'm willing to follow up and guide it to FA. TheCoffee (talk) 19:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi there TheCoffee. I would acctully love to see Typhoon Xangsane as featured as it is a retired storm though there are several things that need doing before this goes for FA.

1. Pre tropical storm infomation - (Check the JTWC Archives and the JMA Archives for this.
2. Referencing of Meterological History Use [Gary Padgett's Summuary here] - Again for the JTWC advisories Check the JTWC Archives
3. Put in a section entitiled Naming - In this talk about what Xangsane means and when it was used last in the Pacific (2000]]). Also PAGASA naming goes in here as well and retirement. see some of the 2008 Pacific Typhoon season articles for an example.
4. Its not a good idea to have PAGASA upgrades/downgrades in an article unless its a storm that only PAGASA monitored.
5. Merge the section you have for Retirement into a section called naming (See Above).
6. You have a link for Retirement that redirects to the chinese verson of the CMA homepage so change it for the english verson produced by the Hong Kong Observatory.
7. You will need to find a source that says Millenyo was retired. - Now for this keep your eyes peeled on the 2009 PTS talk page as i believe we should in a couple of weeks have all the replacement names for PAGASA as we are using the final list this year.
8. I would also use the 2006 ATCRs for the JMA and the JTWC for met history.

If you would like some help or clarification then just let me know. Jason Rees (talk) 04:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm beginning to worry I'm a bit underqualified for the more technical aspects needed for the article, but I'll see what I can do. Why do you say including PAGASA upgrades/downgrades is a bad idea? They're considered the authority in the Philippines, which was hit hardest by the storm. TheCoffee (talk) 20:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Despite the Philippines being the hardest hit, PAGASA isn't the main agency in the Western Pacific, the Japan Meteorological Agency is. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:11, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Its also because PAGASA does not monitor a Typhoon for the whole of its lifetime for example Typhoon Dolphin - Also if you include PAGASA then you have to include TMD HKO CMA etc Upgrades and Downgrades Jason Rees (talk) 03:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

For a storm with almost 300 fatalities, the impact is rather short. Although it may have the same structure, articles shouldn't determine the length of another article. Please look for impact in both english and Filipino. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, the impact section needs expansion. TheCoffee (talk) 20:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)