Talk:Typhoon Maysak (2015)

Latest comment: 7 years ago by RMCD bot in topic Move discussion in progress

Dissipation of Maysak edit

@Xtyphooncyclonex:, @BankSpace1989:, @Nino Marakot: This pertains to you guys especilly. Ok. As of today, 0600Z 07 April, Maysak is currently still active since the JMA is tracking a weak TD from the former Maysak. Please see Jason Rees or the JMA Weather maps for this. Thanks. Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Extras edit

Hi. I just wanted to say what an active start for the year for typhoons. So, I just found out that as of today, about 4 typhoons broke the record in this season:

1.) Typhoon Higos - strongest typhoon in the month of February.

2.) Typhoon Maysak - strongest typhoon prior to the month of April.

3.) Typhoon Noul - in the Top 5 strongest typhoons in month of May and brought heaviest winds ever recorded in Japan in May.

4.) Typhoon Dolphin - earliest 7th named storm within the basin since 1971.

For the articles of Maysak and Noul, do you think we should add a section about its record? And I think we should start adding information in the summary of the 2015 PTS article on the top. What are your thoughts? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

 
Typhoon Maysak passing north of Yap on March 31

Here is an image that was formerly in the article, but I removed it to add a damage pic. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Maysak (2015)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Naughty Jeffrey (talk · contribs) 04:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

I review it again. As it is a powerful pre-April tropical cyclone, it causes some impacts, and they are clearly shown in the article. Good job! --Naughty Jeffrey (talk) 04:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

I will now pass this article. --Naughty Jeffrey (talk) 06:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply


Post-closure comment edit

This review has not been conducted properly, as it is not based on the Good Article criteria, as all GAN reviews must be. I am therefore reverting the approval, and requesting that Naughty Jeffrey refrain from future reviewing until he gains far more experience at Wikipedia and in the area of Good Articles, perhaps by creating and improving his own article and going through the nomination process from the other side.

Last month, Naughty Jeffrey approved some GANs, including this one, without even using a review page like this one: they were all reverted as this one is being reverted. Posts were made to his talk page, pointing out the issues; it appears that he didn't understand the gravity of what he did then. Good Article is a very serious process, and requires reviewers who understand the process and can properly examine the article and its sourcing. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Maysak (2015)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 12george1 (talk · contribs) 00:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hurricanehink, I will now be reviewing this article. At first glance, it looks almost GA-worthy. However, I did find a few issues that should be fixed before I believe that the article should be listed as a Good Article.--12george1 (talk) 00:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

  • "was the most powerful pre-April tropical cyclone on record in the Northwestern Pacific Ocean, causing severe impacts to the islands of Chuuk and Yap in the Federated States of Micronesia." - That transition between the most powerful pre-April TC and the severe impact looks kinda odd to me personally. Maybe substitute the comma for the word "and" and change "causing" to "caused"?
  • "According to the JMA, Maysak" - What is the JMA? :P
  • Just like I said in your FAC for Juan 85, there should be commas if a city and country are mentioned. So there should be a comma after Philippines: "landfall over Luzon, Philippines as a minimal". Fix any other instances of this
  • Speaking of the Philippines, why is it wikilinked twice in the lead?
  • All in all, it is in fact nearly GA-worthy. Just fix/address these issues in a timely manner so that I can list it as a Good Article. Oh, good luck in the WikiCup--12george1 (talk) 00:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • It appears that all of these issues have been either fixed or addressed. Therefore, I will pass this article and list it as a Good Article. Again, good luck in the WikiCup--12george1 (talk) 17:10, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 23 external links on Typhoon Maysak (2015). 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:

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 17:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Move discussion in progress edit

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Typhoon Matmo (2014) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)Reply