Talk:Typhoon Francisco (2019)

Typhoon Francisco (2019) was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 3, 2022). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Weather: Tropical / Western Pacific Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific typhoon work group (assessed as Low-importance).

GA Review

Unsuccessful Etriusus (Talk) 01:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Francisco (2019)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Etriusus (talk · contribs) 01:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyclonebiskit: I'll be starting this GA review, it's been sitting since March. I've reviewed other pages from Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones, so I am familiar with their MOS. Please use a Done, ~~strikethrough~~ or some other means of indicating if an issue has been resolved. I'll take care of minor CE's. Etriusus (Talk) 01:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyclonebiskit: The review has been live for a few days now. If there is no response within the next few days, the article will auto-fail.

Note: Cyclonebiskit has not edited since June 22nd, approx 8 days ago as of writing.

Etriusus (Talk) 20:23, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review has been open for one week, no reply from the nominee. Nominee has been pinged twice and Legobot's messages were also on User:Cyclonebiskit's page. User has been inactive for ~10 days in total, last editing on June 22nd. At this time article will fail review for a lack of nominee activity. Etriusus (Talk) 01:03, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Images

All Image rights are in order.

3 are made by NASA and thus in public domain.

1 was self-published by another user, reverse image search doesn't find anything noteworthy.

Copyvios

Earwig gives a 0.0% similarity, a new record.

Sources

I do not speak Korea or Japanese, so I'll take the content on good faith\

No issues on spot checks

No dead links detected via IAbot, Manual review found error 404 for:

Source # 12-〔台風8号〕宮崎市付近に上陸、今年2個目の上陸台風(8/6)" (in Japanese). Yahoo! Japan. レスキューナウニュース. August 6, 2019. Retrieved August 9, 2019.

Source # 47- 台風の高波で神戸大のボート転覆　自力で１００メートル泳ぐなどして２３人全員無事". Asahi Shimbun (in Japanese). August 6, 2019. Retrieved August 9, 2019.

Sites did not respond when attempting to access (See if you can get it on your end, maybe its a region issue):

Source # 50- "道内で大雨　深川市や沼田町に避難勧告" (in Japanese). HTB北海道テレビ放送. August 9, 2019. Retrieved August 9, 2019.

Source # 58- "Тайфун "Франциско" загнал северокорейские шхуны к берегам Приморья" (in Russian). Вести. August 8, 2019. Retrieved August 22, 2019.

Source # 64- "До Приморья докатилось лишь слабое эхо тайфуна "Франциско". Видеорепортаж Татьяны Дубко" (in Russian). Вести. August 8, 2019. Retrieved August 22, 2019.

Source just links back to the parent site:

Source # 70- Вода с крыши, машины разбиты, дороги под водой: тайфун шествует по Приморью". deita.ru (in Russian). August 9, 2019. Retrieved August 22, 2019.

Personally, I'd recommend archiving all citations once the issues are fixed. I've found foreign, local media can be notoriously plagued with link rot.

Misc

No issues with stability noted. Only a handful of edits since 2019.

Prose

Lead

The info box says 150 kpm, not cited
'minor impacts' specify a bit more

Meteorological history

MOS:SANDWICH, move image. If you run out of space for images, consider a Gallery template
'insufficient divergence', link to Cyclogenesis
favorable conditions fostered organization, explain WP:TECHNICAL
"Typhoon Francisco reached its peak intensity" Later in the passage, it states "have intensified slightly", contradicting this.

"Maintaining this intensity," which intensity?

Preparations and impact

'levels rose' rose to what?

comment: The max wind speed keeps changing. I see 140, 143, and 150. Why does the Meteorological history section use 140 and not 143? Where did 150 come from? Maybe move A maximum wind gust of 143 km/h (89 mph) was observed at Miyazaki Airport up to the Meteorological history section. Additionally, the page is unclear if 130 kph or 140 kph is the peak strength.

Other general CEs made, placing the page on hold. Etriusus (Talk) 18:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.