Talk:2000 Sri Lanka cyclone

Importance

I know some of you might disagree with the mid-importance rating, but if left 500,000 homeless and was among the most destructive cyclones in Sri Lanka history. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Class

B-class, already up for GA. Might even be an A-class article once GA is passed. —Cuiviénen 00:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Good article pass

Congratulations! I have decided that this article is of an all round good standard and so have passed the article for Good Article status. The hard work that has gone into the article is really obvious to see and to all of you who have worked on this, well done! Wikiwoohoo 22:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Cyclone 04B and comments

Should there be a redirect for Cyclone 04B to this title? I left some queries in HTML comments where I couldn't understand the text.Andplus 09:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Not really, as Cyclone 04B is a designation given to cyclones in many years: 2001, 2002 and 2005 all had a 04B. Furthermore Cyclone 04B in 1999 killed over 80 people, significantly more than this storm. I suppose there could be limited utility in making a redirect from Cyclone 04B (1999).--Nilfanion (talk) 09:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Intensity

"3-minute sustained: 165 km/h (105 mph) 1-minute sustained: 120 km/h (75 mph)" How can a 3-minute sustained be higher than a 1-minute sustained? Pål Jensen (talk) 21:20, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

• Different warning centers = Different Estimates. In this case the IMD thought that the system was more intense than the JTWC did.Jason Rees (talk) 23:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/AllDocsByUNID/8592468ad94a0f66852569c400535f56
  • In 2000 Sri Lanka cyclone on 2011-05-25 07:01:12, 404 Not Found
  • In 2000 Sri Lanka cyclone on 2011-06-10 05:52:32, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2000 Sri Lanka cyclone. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607055138/http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-ph/RSS/jtwc/atcr/2000atcr/ch1/chap1_page43.html to http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-ph/RSS/jtwc/atcr/2000atcr/ch1/chap1_page43.html

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) 01:30, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2000 Sri Lanka cyclone. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071027165808/http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/e0124d506dc063aec12569c4004f8f17?OpenDocument to http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/e0124d506dc063aec12569c4004f8f17?OpenDocument
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071027165803/http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/811cc960f7eb4f03c12569c80062995e?OpenDocument to http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/811cc960f7eb4f03c12569c80062995e?OpenDocument
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071027165759/http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/56ec3fdad9e3afb7c12569fc004b940a?OpenDocument to http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/56ec3fdad9e3afb7c12569fc004b940a?OpenDocument
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071027165817/http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/e55a3480fec9b72dc1256b02004dff1d?OpenDocument to http://reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/e55a3480fec9b72dc1256b02004dff1d?OpenDocument

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) 04:26, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020

Looking at this one as part of the ongoing FA sweeps. Some notes below:

• Per WP:RSP, there is no consensus that the Worldwide Socialist Web Site is a particularly reliable source for factual reporting. As WP:FACR requires the higher standard of high-quality RS, this is not a useable source in a FA
• A scan of Google scholar, ProQuest, EBSCO, and Gale suggests that there isn't any significant scholarly literature that I could find not represented here, so it looks good on that front

While that one poor source is the only major issue, it is used a fair bit, and this cannot be marked as satisfactory until it is replaced. This one is on the CCI, but I spot-checked a couple of the references and didn't turn up any issues. Hog Farm _Talk 06:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)