Jump to content

Talk:2002 West Bengal cyclone/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 02:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Link JTWC in opening sentence
  • Orissa is called Odisha now
  • If you have EM-DAT totals, can you still say people are missing?
  • Well, it doesn't disprove that people were still missing--12george1 (talk) 03:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yea it does. That report is up to date, GP is from right around when the storm happened. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you have origins of the storm?
  • Neither Padgett or WMO mention anything before November 10 at 0300 UTC.--12george1 (talk) 03:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a bulletin from the India Meteorological Department indicated that Tropical Cyclone 03B" - India doesn't call it that. That's a JTWC name. It's a tarp!
  • But the first sentence of Padgett's summary says, "Tropical Cyclone 03B was first noted in an IMD bulletin at 0600 UTC on 10 November"--12george1

(talk) 03:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • But you also say IMD called it "Cyclonic Storm BOB 01". Use the ATCR if you want to see what JTWC called it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Initially a tropical depression" - obviously. That's the third sentence in a row saying that
  • No "Thanks Captain Obvious" for me?!? :P --12george1 (talk) 03:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and was upgraded to Cyclonic Storm BOB 01" - maybe say it was the IMD? And perhaps include the initials for the IMD when you first mention it? (ditto JTWC)
  • You should specify that IMD uses 3-minute winds
  • Why should I do that if the maximum sustained wind data comes from JTWC?--12george1 (talk) 02:52, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "According to the maximum sustained wind–central pressure relationship, the storm also attained an estimated minimum barometric pressure of 984 mbar (29.1 inHg)." - huh? Why not just say who estimated that pressure
  • "At 0900 UTC on November 12, it made landfall near Sagar Island, West Bengal with winds of 100 km/h (65 mph)." - third time saying the wind speed.
  • I can't say "at the same intensity", because then there might be confusion with "55-75 km/h (35-45 mph)" in the previous sentence. So I will instead remove the wind speed at another place.--12george1 (talk) 03:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The BT shows the storm dissipating at 1800 UTC over India, also pressure of 990
  • Added the dissipation. Not sure if the minimum pressure is useful, though.--12george1 (talk) 02:52, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "According to the Orissa State Disaster Management Authority (OSDMA) Deputy General Manager Himanshu Patnaik, the communication system had been activated and collectors in coastal districts were given satellite telephones. Patnaik also noted that three units of OSDMA's Orissa Disaster Rapid Action Force mobilized in preparation for the storm." - cut the bit about Patnaik (WP just reports the facts, not using names in these instances). Also, what's with the 2nd sentence? Seems useless
  • "According to the Chief Minister of West Bengal Budhadev Bhattacharya, 111 people were still missing offshore West Bengal by late on November 12." - again, why saying according to this person? Is it vital to the article?
  • "Later, the death toll was raised to 124" - this could actually use clarification where it's from, like what website it is.
  • " Chittagong harbor master Mosin Sikdar said that city authorities met in an emergency session," - stop this! :P
  • Do you need anything in the quote that I said? Why not say "Officials in Chittagong asked" boats, harbor, stuff. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "One death was reported by the Bangladesh Red Crescent after a man drowned while attempting to cross a river in southern Bhola Island." - this is what happens when you keep saying who reported what. It's long and cluttered!
  • "while an estimated 111-560 people were left missing" - you can't say that, since EM-DAT was published after GP's report
  • "Officials accused the meteorological offices of issuing warnings too late" - where?

The article is weirdly formatted. Try focusing more on what the storm did, and what actually happened, as opposed to who said what and junk. On hold for now. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:46, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2002_West_Bengal_cyclone/GA1&oldid=579394961"