Talk:Cyclone Kalunde/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 17:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd link to named storm in the 2nd sentence in the lede.
- Good call. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Kalunde attained cyclone intensity the next day" - might want to link to tropical cyclone scales or something, and it's tropical cyclone intensity, not just cyclone.
- Done. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not quite. You should link to the basin. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
You use intensity/intensify/intense six times in the lede. Try cutting down on that a bit. Especially...
- I did. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"becoming an intense tropical cyclone. Intense Tropical Cyclone Kalunde" You also use Kalunde seven times in the lede, which seems a bit excessive.
- Cut back on a few. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"this storm" - just "the storm" works fine
- Fixed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
You never mention the peak in the lede, which is key since it was the strongest in the season.
- I don't wanna confuse readers with JTWC/MFR crap in the intro. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - Either way it was the strongest in the season. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - It says that in the thesis. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
When did the extratropical remnants dissipate? Also, any reason you don't use the BT? You say March 16 in the infobox, but you don't say the storm actually dissipated, just that MFR stopped tracking it. The BT will say when it dissipated.
- Idk, I say when it stopped tracking to avoid OR. I can't find the BT atm. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:44, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Looking at it, it confirms what GP said. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:55, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - All you have to do is ask :) (and it dissipated on 17th) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So 1,600 homes were destroyed? That seems like a lot. I'd like some further confirmation than from one French source. If true, the article seems on the short side
- Looking at the translation (and google that translated word), I changed it to damaged. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - You sure about that? Google is giving me "destroyed". --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Search that word that "destroyed" translate into general google, and then you get words like break or crushed that have a more postive connotation than "destroyed", but I did not think break or crushed would work. Also, one of several words that mean "damaged" in Frech is very similar to the translated word of "destroyed". Also, everything that is destroyed is damaged. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 7 is broken, which is unfortunate since it's pretty key. That's a bold assertion that the storm wiped out all of the crops. Why isn't there any mention of crops coming back? Were the crops washed away or blown away too?
- Waybacked. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - What do you mean? It's still broken. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, it's not. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
      - Once translated, it says "Sorry, this page no longer exists or is restricted." --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        That has nothing to do with it, it is still officially considered a live url. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"as shower activity increased, though most of the shower activity" - redundancy
- Removed. Y E ^Pacific Special:Contributions/Yellow Evan|^Hurricane]] 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Upon the formation of an eye, Kalunde continued to intensify rapidly and on 1800 UTC MFR declared that Cyclone Kalunde had became an intense cyclone. " - few things. First, when saying "upon", you shouldn't say "continued". I'd say "After" instead of "upon". "on 1800 UTC" doesn't work well, it should be at. But, given it's the beginning of a paragraph, you should add the date (and a comma). Try finding a way to avoid saying Kalunde twice.
- Done. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fix "had became" (should be become). Also, the middle portion of the sentence is still a little weird. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Revised (again). Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
The infobox says 165 mph, but the MH says it reached 160 mph peak, per JTWC. Remember, GP is based off operational data. You should use the best track (for MFR) and the ATCR (for JTWC) when it comes to post-season analyses. And don't mention both (that operationally its peak was X, but post-season was Y), since the differences are minimal. Just fix it so that the peak is the real peak.
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"the JTWC claims" - careful using "claims", as that's a weasel word and implies something. You did it elsewhere in the article.
- Replaced. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Slowly approaching the small island of Rodrigues, MFR later reported winds " - so MFR was approaching Rodrigues?
- Re-worded. YE ^Pacific Special:Contributions/Yellow Evan|^Hurricane]]
  - Try rewording again, that's pretty weird still. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Better? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Not quite. The bit in parenthesis is pretty awkward and the sentence is poorly formatted. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Tweaked a tad. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
You never mention any difference between 10-min and 1-min winds
- Added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did Kalunde actually strike Rodrigues? If not, how close was it?
- Any update on this? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - GP does not say. Should I use the NHC longitude/latitude for this, even though it is the SWIO? YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yea, that'd be ideal, knowing how close it got. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Added. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"Twelve hours later, MFR reported that winds had diminished to 105 km/h (65 mph)." - why is this important? You mention a lot of random windspeeds.*
- Removed. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"Sub, the center of " - something missing??
- A part of a word. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you link convection for the first time in the third MH paragraph?
- Moved. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's still not linked at its first usage in the MH. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"The JTWC stooped monitoring the low on 1200 UTC " - again, avoid "on [time]". And, stooped?
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
~~"600 nmi (1,100 km)" - don't use nmi~~
"Severe coastal damage took place across the island." - poor way to start a paragraph, since the last island you mentioned was Mauritius.
- Tweaked. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Many roads were washed out; as a result, isolating many communities." - get rid of "as a result" and the semicolon
- Done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane
"residents were left in the dark in regards to information on the storm for several hours" - this could be worded better.
- I stumbled over this while doing the article, tbh, can't find a better way to word this. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - "residents lacked information about the storm for several hours." - in the dark is too colloquial. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I like that wording a lot, but done. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Try finding a way to avoid keeping on saying "island". You only mention Rodrigues twice in the impact section, neither of which in the 2nd or 3rd paragraph.
- Added two more. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Subsequently, it was proposed that bridges wee to be built in order to forestall roads from being washed out again." - I don't get this.
- Tweaked. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 21:11, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, the article is decent, but somewhat lacking. I'm not going to fail it, since most of the above is fairly minor. The biggest thing is that it could use more content, or at least some clarification of the content that's there. That 1,600 homes were destroyed is pretty key - what happened to those people and homes? And that also implies that other damage occurred (what about to government buildings, businesses?) If it was that 1,600 homes were damaged, that's a slightly different story. Have you gotten any hits from Lexis Nexis? That might help. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks for the LN stuff and the review. YE ^Pacific ^Hurricane
  - Just a few small things left. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]