Typhoon Orchid (1991) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: February 2, 2019. ( Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Weather: Tropical / Western Pacific Low‑importance 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. 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).

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[tropical cyclone scales#West Pacific|severe tropical storm]] The anchor (#West Pacific) has been deleted by other users before. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Will finish once LN is back up. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 19:29, 4 August 2017 (UTC) reply

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Orchid (1991)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: KN2731 ( talk · contribs) 03:28, 1 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Claiming, will do later today. ~  KN2731 { t · c} 03:28, 1 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Lead

• Wikilink "typhoon"
  • Sure. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "weakens below typhoon intensity" - tense
  • Good call. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply

MH

• "October 1990" - time travel?!
  • lol I put mid-91 in my other GAN for a 90 storm and now I do the reverse smh. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "the depression had attained tropical storm midday on October 3." - missing a word
  • Good call.
• "PAGASA also monitored the storm" - is "began to monitor" more appropriate?
  • I've used both in the same context before. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "estimated that Orchid attained its peak intensity of 225 km/h (140 mph)[1] and 170 km/h (105 mph).[2]" - these values are different from the infobox?
  • Fixed, good catch. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "Shortly after its peak, Orchid began to recurve near 130°E as the ridge receded eastward, allowing Orchid to move north and recurve." seems a little repetitive, maybe change "move north and recurve" to "turn to the north"
• Yes. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "as interaction started with Typhoon Pat. Over a 42-hour period from October 10-12, Orchid took a "stair-stepped” track - moving to the north then back to the northeast due to a binary interaction with Typhoon Pat." - again repetitive, second mention of binary interaction can probably be deleted
  • Reversed. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "both the JTWC and JMA agree that Pat lost typhoon intensity" - tense, also any reason for weakening?
  • Fixed tense, but no. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Impact

• First sentence - "Although" seems unnecessary
  • Combined with next sentence. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "its slow movement south of Japan resulted prolonged rains" - should be "resulted in"
  • Yes it should. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "A peak rainfall total occurred of 762 mm (30.0 in) near Tokyo." - "occurred" should be moved further back
  • Good call. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• Are you spelling out numbers between 10 and 100? Please be consistent
  • Depends on how the rest of the sentence is. If it's say 8 did X and 29 did Y, I spell it out, but otherwise, I don't. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "Offshore Honshu, rough seas sunk the vessel Panama flag although everyone there was rescued safely and only one person was wounded." - sentence seems a bit long, maybe insert a comma before "although"
  •  Done. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "Shin-Kodaira Station was submerged underwater due to landslides, flooding 500 m (1,600 ft) of train tracks." - sounds a bit strange?
  • That's what the article said. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "In each Owase and Ayama, one landslides occurred." um
  • Fixed. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "A total of 995 homes were damaged, and 69 others were dwellings." - 995 homes and 69 dwellings were damaged?
  • Should be destroyed. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• "A 43-yearo-old women was killed because of a landslide in Fukushima Prefecture, where six people were hurt." - two typos, also "[...] woman was killed and six people were hurt by a landslide [...]" has better flow
  • Changes the meaning though. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Refs

• Refs 19, 32, 33 - typo in newspaper name, should be Newswire
  • I knew something wasn't right when I was typing this. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply
• Ref 22 is missing an apostrophe in the title.
  • Fixed. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Mostly typos and phrasing issues, will check refs later. I'll just leave this open for 2+ weeks so you have time to tackle your other GAN and reviews. ~  KN2731 { t · c} 05:58, 1 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Links to all refs (where applicable) work, though the US Navy websites (refs 1 and 7) give me a privacy error at first, you might want to change the links to the metoc.navy.mil website instead. Gonna AGF on all the Japanese and Lexis Nexis articles cos I can't read Japanese and can't access the latter. ~  KN2731 { t · c} 13:45, 1 February 2019 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the review. As for the DT bit, I should point out that I think I know what I'm doing as I sort of know what kinds of errors Google Translate makes over the years despite not knowing any language outside English. Y E ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:42, 2 February 2019 (UTC) reply