Talk:Typhoon Fengshen

Frengshen upgraded to Category Three

In the JTWC's running best track, Fengshen was upgraded to a strong Category Three with peak winds of 110kts (125mph) on the 21^st at 0000UTC. Fengshen tracking file Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Official picture of death

The Philippine National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) on June 23, 2008, reported that: 98 people died, 115 were missing, 66 were hurt, 99,687 families were affected, 155,564 houses were damaged, 53,706 were totally wrecked, and 109,837 were partially destroyed, in 10 regions, due to typhoon “Frank" as of Monday noon (excluding the MV Princess of the Stars incident). The Philippine National Red Cross placed the death toll at 229. Frank destroyed P 500 billion crops amid its P 1.7 billion damage to property in Iloilo. The US responded by donating P 4 million and sent USNS Stockham and US Navy P-3 maritime surveillance aircraftship, for rescue.GMA NEWS.TV, NDCC tally: 98 dead, 115 missing, 66 hurt AFP reported 224 dead and 374 missing (598) as of Monday.Afp.google.com, 598 dead or missing after Philippines typhoon: officials--Florentino floro (talk) 10:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

For when Typhoon Fengshen Dies......

If you just copy this template off the edit page of this subject you will get this:

Typhoon Fengshen (Frank)

Very strong typhoon (JMA scale)
Category 3 typhoon (SSHWS)
Typhoon Fengshen at peak wind speed of 110kts
Formed	June 16, 2008
Dissipated	June 26, 2008
Highest winds	10-minute sustained: 175 km/h (110 mph) 1-minute sustained: 205 km/h (125 mph)
Lowest pressure	941 hPa (mbar); 27.79 inHg
Fatalities	598 Direct,700 Missing
Damage	None
Areas affected	Philippines, Hong Kong, Macau, Shenzhen
Part of the 2008 Pacific typhoon season

President Macagrapal-Arroyo's Quote

First, the cite below is not to BBC. Second, the link does not even have her quoted as making this statement. She was in Fresno, CA June 22. I saw no news story where the president made this quote. If she did make this statement it should be properly referenced and linked.

BBC quoted Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as saying: "Why did you allow it to sail and why was there no ample warning? I want answers."[13]

If no evidence surfaces it will be removed from the article. --Edwin Larkin (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Right well i have just checked the bbc Article and it does quote gloria Macapagal-Arroyo saying those things - wats happened is that someone has put the bbc Article in the wrong place Jason Rees (talk) 17:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

NDCC

The Philippines National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) reported that "Frank" damaged a total of P 3.2 billion worth of agricultural and fish products and more than 300 schools nationwide (P 212 million). Additional damages to infrastructure were pegged at P 750 million, and fishing boats at P110 million, or a total of P 4.27 billion pesos.Inquirer.net, NDCC: Damage from ‘Frank’ seen to reach P4.27Bgmanews.tv/story, Estimated typhoon damages exceed P3 billion - NDCC--Florentino floro (talk) 10:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Death figures

Its been ages since the storm... the 41 still missing are probably dead.

Itfc+canes=me (talk) 10:06, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

JMA Best Track

Fengshen 0806 Jason Rees (talk) 13:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Impact

Im going to be Massivly rewriting this section over the next few days within my Sandbox esspecially the phillipine section. Jason Rees (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Retirement

Since the WMO are bound to follow PAGASA's lead and retire Fengshen, should we move this page like we have done to various pages in the Atlantic? Jason Rees (talk) 03:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I Agree with you. Fengshen is an obvious case, and it does deserve the main article. Does anyone else agree about this? Well? Anyone else out there agree? Yellow? Thoughts about this anyone? 99.52.152.91 (talk) 23:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

While Fengshen might seem like an obvious case, I'd rather wait. It's been several months since the storm, and it shouldn't be that much longer till the WMO meets. When would they meet for WPAC, BTW? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

They met last month Hink Jason Rees (talk) 15:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Did nothing come out of it? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

That meeting wasn't for 2008; it was for 2007, and no names were retired. And why would you rather wait, Hink? Fengshen killed over 1,000 people in the Philipines, and caused 480 million in damage (13.5 billion in Philipine dollars). Many other typhoons have caused a lower death toll and damage toll than Fengshen here, like 2003's Imbudo and 2006's Durian. They were retired, so it's reasonable to say Fengshen will be retired as well. 76.235.165.167 (talk) 16:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I only wanted to wait because I thought the meeting would be soon, but I was wrong. My only other season for waiting is because the season is already over. Normally when we move the page, we do it while the storm is active, or a significant news item. As that's not the case with Fengshen, then we should wait till its retirement is confirmed. That's how we did it with WPAC in 2006. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

1. Actully the Typhoon Committee will look at typhoons from November 2007 to November 2008. My source for this infomation is the report of the 2006 Typhoon Committee which clearly states that the names Chanchu, Bilis, Saomai, Xangsane and Durian which were Typhoons which formed that year before the Typhoon Committee met.
2. Ive not seen anything on the WMO/Typhoon Committee's/CMA's/JMA's/HKO's/PAGASA's Websites yet that says anything about the 41st session of the Typhoon Committee.
3. Hink the season is not over yet it runs year round.
4. It was a significant news item at the time (MV Princess of Stars)

Jason Rees (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

By the season being over, I meant the activity has slowed down significantly. It's almost 2009. It is six months after the storm. I don't see why we have to move it right now, when it is not in the news. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:42, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I know, but this storm is like a Gustav or Ike kind of case because it's very likely Fengshen will be retired, so i'm saying that we should move it to Typhoon Fengshen because it's an obvious retirement canidate. Over 1,300 people died in the Philipines from Fengshen. Not retiring this name is like not retiring Ike or Gustav, if you get what i'm saying. 76.235.213.151 (talk) 11:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

What we believe is obvious is irrelevant on Wikipedia. Please see WP:CRYSTAL. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 14:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying it will be retired: i'm saying it should get the main article because it will probrably or likely will be retired. I'm not saying it will be; i'm saying it's likely, though, so it should get the main page. This storm is an Ike or Gustav case, so it should get the main page. I know Wikipedia is no crystal ball, but you agreed that Ike and Gustav would get the main page because they are obvious canidates, and because Fengshen is obvious as well, it should also get the main page, if you get my point here. 76.235.160.175 (talk) 21:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

That still violates WP:NOR and WP:CRYSTAL. We wait until the storm is actually retired before we move it. Also, I was against moving Ike and Gustav, for what it's worth. –Juliancolton ^{Happy Holidays} 21:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I didn't know you were against Ike or Gustav, but I'm just saying that Fengshen has just as much of a chance to be retired as Gustav and Ike. We only give storms the main article if they are obvious cases. I would find it impossible for Ike to not be retired, with over 30 billion in damage. It was given the main article as well as with Gustav, because they are obvious cases. Fengshen is also obvious - just like Ike and Gustav, so it should be given the main page as well. 76.235.160.175 (talk) 22:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

It was also decided months ago at Talk:2008 Atlantic hurricane season, Talk:2007 Atlantic hurricane season, and WP:WPTC that, from now on, obvious retirement canidates will be given the main article. The TCP agrees that storms like Gustav, Ike, and Fengshen are such storms, because they are cetain of their retirement (they know what they're talking about when they move the page, because they're accurate about their projections). In other words, i'm saying it should or will get the main page because of this new rule. It's not guessing or anything like that; it's moving the page because of it's impact. 76.235.160.175 (talk) 01:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Forecasting Errors section

In this section, I dont think it make sense.

It will make sense once its filled in as the forecasting errors for Fengshen were abysmal - which led to the MV Princess of Stars sinking and PAGASA being sued. Jason Rees (talk) 15:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Moved the name of "Typhoon Frank" to be more visible

Rarely do you hear people in the Philippines call this typhoon "Fengshen". Indeed I only hear it from weather and disaster geeks (so to speak). So therefore, I raised the visibility of that name though doing so probably violates some long-standing policy (which I would argue to change). This is English Wikipedia and the Philippines is the third largest English-speaking country in the world, the only one hit by this typhoon. Among English speakers, "Typhoon Frank" is and will be far more prevalent than "Typhoon Fengshen". --Bruce Hall (talk) 05:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

It is not an international name. That is all. -- Meow 05:44, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Typhoon Fengshen (2008). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080626183341/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5h_3yhnZvsE90p8kvwkFoSW99kjIgD91ETB6G0 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h_3yhnZvsE90p8kvwkFoSW99kjIgD91ETB6G0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080626173608/http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5h_3yhnZvsE90p8kvwkFoSW99kjIgD91F0PAO0 to http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h_3yhnZvsE90p8kvwkFoSW99kjIgD91F0PAO0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Typhoon Fengshen (2008). 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://www.geocities.com/dynasmon/PAGASA.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/dynasmon/PAGASA.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/dynasmon/PAGASA.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/dynasmon/PAGASA.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storyPage.aspx?storyId=123222

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)