Talk:Typhoon Vamco

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

Should officially become an article[edit]

I think this should be an official article now. I live in Antipolo City right now and so far this typhoon was not really an ordinary typhoon right now. It may be a Category 2, but like what I've experienced right now at this moment, its like Typhoon Conson (Basyang) all over again. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 17:50, 11 November 2020 (UTC) [reply]

As someone who is from the Capital Region (Manila), I concur. Personally, I think this storm is closer to Typhoon Xangsane (Milenyo) and Typhoon Rammasun (Glenda) in terms of intensity and impacts. We might be seeing a historic storm here. Vida0007 (talk) 19:01, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

mph over km/h? 1-min over 10-min?[edit]

Hello! I'm just concerned about this sentence in the Meteorological history section:

Then, surrounded by favorable conditions for an intensification, Vamco continued to gain strength and reached its peak of intensity, with winds of 110 mph (175 km/h) and 10-min sustained at 80 mph (130 km/h) and pressure of 970 mbar, supporting Vamco a high-end category 2–equivalent typhoon.

It appears that the Meteorological history section of this article gives more precedence to miles per hour over kilometers per hour and 1-minute sustained winds over 10-minute sustained winds despite Vamco being a Northwestern Pacific tropical cyclone. This sentence makes it sound like Vamco is an Atlantic/Northeastern Pacific/Central Pacific hurricane. — Nairb.Idi9 (talk)

Added in by Miguel 04012010 with this edit. It's also unsourced, so I had to dig through the trackfile and JTWC's warnings a bit before I could confirm the data. I've now converted the units to km/h. Chlod (say hi!) 09:06, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ABS-CBN shutdown and the information gap[edit]

There is a little sentence right there in the Impact section which mentions an information gap caused by the shutdown of ABS-CBN. While I am certain it may have affected news coverage, I feel that they would've been affected by the typhoon as well, and the sentence was added to simply criticize the current response to the disaster. Of course I assume this was done to improve the article, but two of the references were about Typhoon Rolly and not Typhoon Ulysses, and would fit better in that typhoon's own page. Also, someone else put an inline comment thinking that this is an undue weight situation and that it must be discussed in the talk page, so here it is.

What do you think? RBolton123 (talk) 15:37, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly DUE, but maybe best applied to the Rolly article instead of this one. However, we should hold on this right now, since the extent of the impact has not yet been determined, as hundreds of areas are currently submerged in the water (which is flooding the news instead of more reports from the disaster agency). If an article comes out connecting Ulysses to the same idea, then maybe it could be kept. So wait on it for a bit maybe? Chlod (say hi!) 15:42, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since reliable sources have linked the shutdown to increased difficulties in preparing and responding to this typhoon in particular, it should most certainly be mentioned. The level of detail required would depend on the overall significance of the shutdown's effects - if it was just a minor contributing factor, maybe a couple sentences would do; if it played a large role in obstructing access to information in rural areas, an entire paragraph (or more) may be necessary. (I'm not familiar with what exactly is going on, so this is hypothetical.) ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 16:23, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just to get you in the loop: To summarize, ABS-CBN had regional networks (besides their national one) which were able to reach areas without strong coverage (say, an island or the middle of a mountain). After they lost their franchise, they had to shut down all of those regional programs, which meant those in far-flung areas can no longer get any news unless someone brings it to them, whether it be some other person or evacuation crew. If you want to learn more, the linked article, ABS-CBN franchise renewal controversy, details what led to the event, and the list article List of ABS-CBN Corporation channels and stations shows an entire list of the stations shut down. Chlod (say hi!) 16:29, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I found better links already and replaced the old ones. These ones are related to Ulysses/Vamco specifically.- Chieharumachi (talk) 17:48, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Magat Dam and surrounding areas[edit]

Good day.

I think we need A LOT more info regarding Magat Dam and areas below it. The typhoon has caused a lot of rainfall and the dam is almost at its spilling level already. With all seven gates open, the inflow is still larger than its outflow; we are expecting widespread flood and damages.

Some sources: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

HiwilmsTalk 18:46, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I couldn't find any sources about it (that were not videos) so this is actually really helpful. I've been trying to find some sources for it for a while now, since Twitter isn't the best source despite the hundreds of requests for rescues. I'll put this in as soon as possible. --Chlod (say hi!) 18:50, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to contribute later this afternoon since I'm a bit sleepy now. This is something I could give for now. HiwilmsTalk 19:20, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like I'll be sleeping as well. I'll continue working on this in a few hours. Hopefully coverage has improved by then. Chlod (say hi!) 19:33, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 November 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved — Clear consensus to move the page. The only other "Typhoon Vamco" doesn't have an article and doesn't meet WPTC requirements to have one. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 04:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC) ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 04:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Typhoon Vamco (2020) → Typhoon Vamco – The 2020 typhoon has already surpassed the damages caused by previous similarly named typhoons. The infrastructure damages in Marikina alone is estimated by the city mayor to be at Php 10 billion (USD 207.6 million), while economic losses at Php 30–40 billion (USD 622.9–830.5 million) according to an ABS-CBN report. It was also mentioned on CNN Philippines on air but I haven't found the video yet. DPWH mentioned a Php 4.254 million (USD 88.3 million) damage which is still more than the other three. HiwilmsTalk 19:18, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. As it stands now, there's even more impact to be assessed. Chlod (say hi!) 19:22, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait more damage is expected in Vietnam. Since I'm a page mover, I'll do the other move. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 20:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support why do The Philippines get so many storms? Condolences to the affected areas. 108.35.187.79 (talk) 20:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Mazum24 (talk) 21:17, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Damages and deaths in the Philippines are very high, and there isn't much anticipated impact in Vietnam due to the forecast cone only expecting 25-30 mile per hour winds, and I dought its gonna cause much rain saying that it's moving fastish. I like hurricanes 21:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for now While I opposed the move for Typhoon Molave (at least for now), Typhoon Vamco is kind of a different situation as it is shaping up as one of the most destructive typhoons in recent Philippine history. However, I am not yet fully supporting the move because damage assessments are still being made in Central Luzon, Metro Manila, CALABARZON & Bicol, while Cagayan Valley is still dealing with its effects until now due to dam-related flooding. In conclusion, unless it is almost certain that Vamco would not be used for a tropical cyclone in the future, I am holding back my support. (Though personally I believe this is the last time Vamco will be used.) Vida0007 (talk) 21:58, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per reasons stated by the other users. Also, there are other typhoons which were not retired but still had their own articles without the year: most notably Typhoon Tip in 1979. Vida0007 (talk) 20:12, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I have no words. SMB99thx my edits 01:01, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Storm name retirement should be the criteria for such an article move. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 08:28, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the name "Vamco" officially retires, despite the typhoon being a highly-destructive cyclone in our country, with our area among those experiencing its very worst effects. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:55, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Based on the amount of damage that has been done, Ulysses was retired already, and Vamco could be retired as well. Media coverage has also been extensive. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 10:44, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose wait till its retired. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 14:15, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Whether it's retired or not is irrelevant, it's Wikipedia's WP:PRIMARYTOPIC conventions that apply here, which consider the various topics through the lens of common usage and long-term significance. In this case, it's clear that the current storm leads the 2015 storm and others on both counts, so this should be fairly swiftly moved to the base name.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:20, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: much more notable than the other Typhoon Vamco's. Main topic amongst the group of articles with the same name.--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 23:25, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support name was retired. At least Ulysees. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 00:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Mazum24 (talk) 00:41, 15 November 2020 (UTC) it was retired so u need to change it plus 44B filipino dollars is insane[reply]
  • Support I have no words but I support moving Typhoon Vamco (2020) to Typhoon Vamco Cristianpogi678 (talk) 15:25, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and above. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 16:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Śαǿturα💬 19:22, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and it appears to meet Wikipedia's conventions for moving to the base name. Jurisdicta (talk) 01:58, 16 November 2020 (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.

Shouldn't "Typhoon Ulysses" be moved too?[edit]

Shouldn't "Typhoon Ulysses" be moved too? What's the process for that? Currently it redirects to all the storms whose international names were Ulysses- Chieharumachi (talk) 06:22, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 12:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Moved on the grounds of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Set index moved to List of storms named Ulysses. Redirect created at Typhoon Ulysses to this article. Chlod (say hi!) 13:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ulysses retirement and questionable removal of it made by FleurDeOdile[edit]

I just noticed the removal of retirement section of this article. I had to disagree with the edit move made by User:FleurDeOdile (marking it as an INVALID SOURCE), why did he/she considered it as an invalid source? Does he/she lived in the Philippines too? Manila Bulletin was one of reliable tabloid news source in the Philippines and it was CLEARLY stated in the given link that PAGASA officially retiring the name Ulysses. I don't think that FleurDeOdile was assuming good faith edits here (especially to its editing behaviour), since the removes credible source was officially proven by the weather government agency in the Philippines, and if the grammar was only an issue here, it can be corrected. This is insane to say that Manila Bulletin's articles are not valid. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 00:21, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that the names were "to be retired" and were not actually retiring the names. Until we can definitively say that the PAGASA has retired the names, we can't call those names retired yet. Chlod (say hi!) 00:25, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, fix your signature please. There's a missing </small> after Heke!. Chlod (say hi!) 00:26, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PAGASA tends to say that they are going to retire a particular name when they are retiring names though. For instance, Urduja (Kai-tak) and Vinta (Tembin) in 2017 were singled out by PAGASA as names to be retired, but it took a long time (more than a year) before replacement names were formalized. It was not until early 2019 when the weather bureau replaced the said names with Uwan and Verbena. Not to mention that the source mentioned in the article is Manila Bulletin, which has a record in reporting PAGASA's retired names. For example, this Bulletin article from last year said: "Destructive typhoon “Tisoy” (international name: Kammuri) will soon be retired by the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) from its list of tropical cyclone names due to the cyclone’s massive damage to infrastructure and agriculture." Notice the similar wording 11 months later, this time in relation to Ulysses (Vamco). Vida0007 (talk) 21:14, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Then the parts saying that the name was "retired" should be changed to future tense. But that's obviously no longer an issue, since the section's already been included in the article with the necessary corrections. Chlod (say hi!) 15:23, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of public reaction and climate justice(?)[edit]

 Done. Section inserted as "Controversy" (now "Public reactions to government response"), with eight references, supporting 4 topics. Feel free to modify or add to in order to fit WP:NPOV or WP:DUE. Please monitor this section as it may attract censors or vandals. Chlod (say hi!) 09:36, 16 November 2020 (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.

Recently, citizens on social media have been calling out the government's response to the floods and the typhoon. I'd like to put this into the article, however there may be concerns about its due weight. I've linked some possible sources below, so can someone please tell me if it'll be okay to put a paragraph (or two) related to this in the article?

Note: All linked sources above qualify for WP:RS and WP:V. Thanks in advance. Chlod (say hi!) 07:56, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I support the addition of the cites by User:Chlod as it adds another insight for the article. The response by the people in relation to the government's actions is appropriate and the sources appear to be reliable in nature. Jurisdicta (talk) 01:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - There's more than enough academic literature to support the reliability of all this. If anything, two paragraphs may be insufficient to cover the issues. (In which case I think there's merit in a spinoff article). - Chieharumachi (talk) 09:16, 16 November 2020 (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.

Section name[edit]

Except, please don't name the section "controversy"? It's vague, and the vagueness invites WP:Due questions. If you're having any trouble coming up with an alternative section name, I'll try to read more thoroughly later tonight and give suggestions. But for now, yeah, I think naming it "controversy" is a bad idea. - Chieharumachi (talk) 09:54, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changed it to "Public reactions to government response" for now - Chieharumachi (talk) 09:58, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sure thing. Thanks! Chlod (say hi!) 10:02, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

There has been controversy between the usage of these two images for the Infobox

(1) File:Vamco 2020-11-13 1845Z.jpg (2) File:Vamco 2020-11-14 0500Z.jpg
borderless borderless

There are good arguments for both as one is a great quality but is at a weakened state. The other isn’t as great as a quality but does show the peak intensity of Vamco. Let me know what you think. Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 15:45, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image 2 – Following WP:WPTC/S's Image guidelines, Clarity of the storm and its context should be emphasized over closeness to peak. Not only is 1 of a lower quality, but there's a nasty cut in the middle of the storm. And since it's a false image since the peak occurred during night, 2 would be the better candidate instead of 1. Chlod (say hi!) 15:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image 1 however use it so it shows it's dark. Vietnam is on GMT+7 so 18:45 UTC is 1:45 AM there. 05:00 UTC is noon for them. --HurricaneTracker495 (talk) 20:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image 2 For clarity. SMB99thx my edits 01:41, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image 2 For clarity. Agree with User:SMB99thx and User:Chlod, until and if a third, better image shows up. But Image 1 should be retained somewhere in the body.- Sparryx (talk) 03:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image 2. Easy decision. Image 1 has lines. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 16:57, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COVID-19 and Vamco preparations, impact and aftermath[edit]

I think it's important that we not interpret the impact of Vamco as isolated events. At least in the Philippines, preparations, impact, and aftermath were all signficiantly affected by the fact that this all happened in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the nature of news, this may be downplayed in emphasis there a bit, but the coverage is there. Due to the encyclopedic nature of Wikipedia, we should adjust our writing because we're not dealing with journalistic practice reflecting "recency."- Sparryx (talk) 03:18, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic were felt during the typhoon (which, as far as I've read, goes just as far as evacuation center preparation and resuces), then it should be included. Not sure how the flow would go though. Chlod (say hi!) 06:54, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Typhoon_Vamco&oldid=1211145248"