(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
"The November 2016 Vietnam tropical depression was a tropical depression that caused heavy flooding throughout central and southern Vietnam in early November 2016." I think we know the TD happened in November 2016. Get rid of the second mention of the date and the tropical depression.
"With favorable environments and an increase of organization" What is "favorable environments"? Do you mean "favorable conditions"?
"The system continued moving westward over land and fully dissipated on November 6." Did it dissipate, or did JMA stop tracking it?
"Some say that Vietnam had its worst flooding since 2011." that needs to be proved by the article behind the paywall.
"By November 4, the JTWC started to track the disturbance, giving it a "low" chance of strengthening further, as it was located about 343 km (213 mi) east of Ho Chi Minh City." JTWC used nautical miles, use that instead of miles for the conversion.
"The reason behind this was the system had a rapidly consolidating low-level circulation center" This could be merged with the previous sentence.
"in the same time" At the same time.
What is two hours after "Later that day"?
"still stating a rapidly consolidating system over in warm waters of 29°C (84.2°F)." I think "As the rapidly consolidating system was over the warm waters of 29C".
"Though during the next day, the JTWC cancelled their alert due to the fact that the system was weakening and nearing land with increasing wind shear." Replace "due to the fact that" with "as".
"Reported" should not be used so often in an article. Such as, "About 27,000 homes were reported flooded within the region." Did it flood or not?
"Though, the death total from the flooding since mid October combined have been topped and totaled to 50." Probably better as "A total of 50 people passed away from both the depression and prior flooding in mid-October."
What was said in References 1 and 5? How reliable are those sources?
Third external link is dead.
You said that the TD "formed as an area of low-pressure off the coast of the region of Sabah, Malaysia." The reference you cited did not say that. A bit of synthesis there.
What part of Reference 8 did it say that the JMA stopped tracking it?
"Due to its proximity to land and a very exposed center, both agencies canceled their warnings as it made landfall over in Southern Vietnam." - this is not correct. The correct statement is "Due to its proximity to land, the depression failed attain tropical storm status." or something along those lines.
"Just before November 5, the JTWC issued a Tropical Cyclone Formation Alert (TCFA) as a rapidly consolidating system was over in warmer waters with temperatures of approximately 29°C (84.2°F)." @Typhoon2013: Please stop using the phrase "over in". There is very rarely a good reason to use two prepositions in a row, and here, is not even correct. Also, "a rapidly consolidating system" is too vague. I suggest "At 18:00 UTC on November 4, the JTWC, observing a rapidly-consolidating center and warm waters with temperatures near 29°C (84.2°F), issued a Tropical Cyclone Formation Alert.", or just outright removing this sentence, since you should be telling the story of the storm, not the agencies (look at what I wrote at 2016 Pacific typhoon season#Typhoon Nock-ten (Nina)).
"The flooding had occurred as early as October when the remnants of Tropical Storm Aere and Typhoon Sarika affected most of Vietnam." Please don't use the past perfect so much. In other words, "had occurred" is not accurate to use here. I suggest "Vietnam already had experienced flooding from the remnants of Tropical Storm Aere and Typhoon Sarika since 2016, and the depression exacerbated the disaster." or something similar - consider splitting this into two sentences.
After I heard offsite there were problems in this GAN, I decided to take a look into copyediting it. It did not take as long as I thought it would, and there were parts of the article that were decent, however, other parts were not, and I had to re-word it. Prime example is right here: "200 houses were destroyed at that time, bringing in the total of 40,000 homes destroyed in 12 provinces. 12,000 hectares of crop were damages too while more than 40,000 cattle and poultry were dead and washed away". There are several problems with these two sentences. First you note 200 houses were destroyed, then 40,000. Which one is it? (I looked at the source and it said 40,000 were inundated, which in case you don't know, means flooded. In the second sentence, "were damages" is a very weak phrase and "too"is not an encyclopedic word. Also the case with "were dead" (very weak and turns out to be redundant) and "washed away" (also weak). Oh, shouldn't there be more impact out there? Maybe try Relief Web and search "Vietnam flood November 2016"? One last thing, I also added a few Template:who tags to the lead. YEPacificHurricane 07:39, 5 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Since no significant work has been done to the article, the Good Article Nomination has failed. You can re-nominate this article, but please consider asking other WPTC users (IRC), Guild of Copy Editors, and peer review.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 02:36, 10 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Fail
WTF!?
Pass
On hold