Talk:Typhoon Chataan

Todo

More intro and impact. Jdorje 19:42, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Chataan's PAGASA Name of Gloria

I noticed on the Typhoon 2000 site that the name Chataan had while in the PAGASA region, Gloria, was replaced by Glenda and that a small note at the bottom confirmed this. Was the name Gloria officially retired and should the name change be noted in the article? Here's the source for the name change: http://www.typhoon2000.ph/names.htm Jake52 My talk 04:40, 27 June 2006 (EST)

Absolutely, the PAGASA listing shows Glenda as the current name.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Links

• Damage pic in Guam
• Relief Web

♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Links to damage reports and locations

• [1] Ward Prefecture: 9.2 billion yen
  
• [2] Oshima in Hokkaido: 153 million yen
  
• [3] Aomori Prefecture: ~140 billion yen
  

Added some of the sources, more when I have time. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Damage estimates

Given the doubt that has arisen with regard to the recent additions of extreme damage estimates, I've reverted the past few edits to this article as a temporarily solution. We need at least one more reliable English source to confirm that this is one of the costliest storms in the world. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 17:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• hey, I'll review this article soon. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

review

• The article is very thorough and clear, considering the complexity of the subject. I have one suggestion.

• in the lede you mention PAGASA and don't mention it again until the end. A first mention should include Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). Is there a way you could include this?

• Well, the first mentions are in the first sentence. I don't wanna have too much there, but I don't want it to be confusing. Do you have any suggestions? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

• No, but I was very confused by it. Had to do a find and located it in the lede and then click on the link. Perhaps if you don't mention PAGASA again it would be ok. The first mention at least has a link, so no search and find is necessary. The article is fairly complicated to follow and I found myself hunting back a fair number of times, but none only mentioned in the lede and the last sentence. I won't fail on this account as I don't see this as part of the GA criteria. MathewTownsend (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

• I've made a few changes for the sake of prose that you're free to revert.[4]. Put on hold awaiting response, but that's the only concern I have.
  • Thanks, I saw your changes and loved them. :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

MathewTownsend (talk) 14:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry, I didn't see that sentence at the bottom of the lede. Don't know how I missed that with "Find"! It's fine. MathewTownsend (talk) 15:05, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Provides references to all sources:

   B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Pass!

• Congratulations on a fine article! MathewTownsend (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Typhoon Chataan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/orders/IPS-B6B5F093-DBDE-4FBA-9C84-1A190E2EFA0C.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151003190826/http://www.fema.gov/news-release/chuuk-recovery-efforts-continue-106-million-disaster-assistance-approved to http://www.fema.gov/news-release/chuuk-recovery-efforts-continue-106-million-disaster-assistance-approved
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150418165349/http://www.fema.gov/news-release/typhoon-recovery-continues-736-million-approved to http://www.fema.gov/news-release/typhoon-recovery-continues-736-million-approved

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Typhoon Chataan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/orders/IPS-B6B5F093-DBDE-4FBA-9C84-1A190E2EFA0C.pdf
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130221165015/http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20060726-11787/%91Glenda%92_originally_%91Gloria%92 to http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20060726-11787/%91Glenda%92_originally_%91Gloria%92

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)