Talk:Typhoon Ida (1958)

Tasks

• Expand
• Make it into good article

Jeffrey Gu (talk) 00:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Ida 1958 track.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

The following images, used in this article, have been nominated for deletion: File:Ida 1958 track.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status File:IDA EYE.JPG has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status File:Ida pressure drop.png has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:11, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Kanogawa/Kanagawa discrepancy

Hmm, my edition of Longshore, 1998 refers to Ida as the "Kanagawa typhoon" while the Time article calls it the "Kanogawa typhoon", so I'm confused about which to trust. HurricaneFan25 16:57, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I changed it to "Kanogawa Typhoon", per the Digital Typhoon website. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Ida (1958)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs) 16:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• I'll probably do finish this review by 23:00 UTC, but I might not have the time to do so. There's a bit of info from Longshore, 1998 that I might add to the article. I'm consulting it for this GA review. HurricaneFan25 16:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
  • And no, TAWX, you don't get to fix these for Hink. HurricaneFan25 21:32, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   A link to 1958 Pacific typhoon season in the lede wouldn't be harmful.

   On September 22 Ida turned to the north A comma is needed here, right after "22". On September 22, Ida turned to the north

   It became extratropical the next day Link extratropical to extratropical cyclone as not everyone knows what they are.

   No pre-tropical cyclonegenesis in the MH?

   However, over a 14 hour period Use a hyphen, not a non-breaking space. However, over a 14-hour period

   Link UTC the first time you use it, not the second time you use it.

   and at about 0500 "at about" sound strange. Reword it to something like and near 0500

   The winds gradually decreased → Ida's winds gradually decreased

   the Kano River flooding destroyed two villages along the Izu Peninsula Reword to the flooding of the Kano River destroyed to villages along the Izu Peninsula for clarity.

   the landslides and flooding occurred in populated areas Remove this; it's pretty obvious given what you said right before that.

   Publishers in the prose should be italicized. (e.g. A report by Time magazine)

   520,000 homes were flooded, which is the most on record The most on record for where? The prefecture? Japan? Internationally?

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Requested move 22 July 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: withdrawn. (non-admin closure) SMB99thx XD (contribs) 05:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

---

Typhoon Ida (1958) → Typhoon Ida – Though this storm might not pretty safely considered primary topic as in other storms listed on WikiProject Tropical cyclones' vital articles list, i can say that this storm is more prominent in damages and deaths (not considering popularity, average views and searches) than only Ida that is a hurricane, the 2009 incarnation. SMB99thx XD (contribs) 04:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose the nominator's argument does not consider the other versions of Ida in the Western Pacific. This isn't even the most deadly version of Ida. That honor goes to the 1945 typhoon that killed 2K in Japan, which literally makes that version more deadly - a key part of the nominator's rationale. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 04:10, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose Per above. I would also not use that list as a reason to move any storm. Please think about other storms before proposing another move.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 04:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose @SMB99thx: Once again, please refrain from moving pages or proposing moves until you understand the current consensus on that subject.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:59, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
• Comment Now i'll refrain doing this all, i'll promise. In all of this mess, now i'll say this: Nomination withdrawn.--SMB99thx XD (contribs) 05:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.