# Talk:Cyclone Forrest

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cyclone Forrest (1992)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: 12george1 (talk · contribs) 22:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello User:Cyclonebiskit, I will also review this article. After a quick skim, I just say that you did a good job of this one. However, I still have some issues that need to be fixed/addressed, ok?--12george1 (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

"Tracking generally west the system steadily organized into a tropical storm" - Not sure here, but it might be a good idea to put a comma between "west" and "the"
"Category 4-equivalent cyclone on the Saffir–Simpson hurricane scale with winds" - It's called the "Saffir-Simpson hurricane wind scale" now
It was called that then, though Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:57, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, but I changed it to "Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale" inside the bracket.--12george1 (talk) 16:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
"soon affected the cyclone as it turned abruptly eastward. Forrest" - I looked at the track and that isn't quite eastward. Maybe east-northeast or slightly north of due east? Generally eastward?
"In Thailand, the system produced a storm surge that damaged or destroyed 1,700 homes and killed two people. Significant agricultural damage also occurred" - You sure that was also storm surge impacts? Or could there have been flooding and strong winds too?
"Only two deaths took place in the country and overall damage was light." - I know damage was "light", but maybe you should add some damage statistics. Like that half the homes of St. Martin's Island were damaged or 200 thatched roof homes on Shah Farid Island suffered impact.
"Development into a tropical depression was not anticipated until the system cleared the Philippines; however, organization was slower than forecast and a second TCFA was issued late on November 11. " - I'm not sure about how organization was slower than forecast. The system organized after clearing the Philippines, did it not?
That's what was conveyed through the ATCR. I guess they expected it to develop before passing Palawan Island maybe? There's no way to be certain though since the advisories are probably only kept in some physical archive on Hawaii (At least I hope they are....). Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Alright, that sounds possible too.--12george1 (talk) 16:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
"As it approached Vietnam, it turned southwest and moved parallel to the coast before resuming its westerly track" - Too many it/its in one sentence. Also, did the JTWC approach Vietnam? :P I would replace the first "it" with something like "the storm" or "the cyclone"
"The storm's proximity to land inhibited intensification, and it attained winds of 100 km/h (65 mph) as it moved over the Gulf of Thailand." - What date was this?
Now that I am reading Thailand's impact section, there is nothing about storm surge
"On November 20, the entire coast of Bangladesh was placed on red alert, the highest level of cyclone warning," - Add the year after that date, because someone might think you are still talking about 1991
""[not get] caught with our [(Bangladeshi authorities)] pants down like last year."" - Funny quote :P Anyway, what's with "Bangladeshi authorities" in both brackets and parenthesis?
Brackets are to show that it's an insert to the quote for clarification, the parentheses are there to show it's an explanation of "our" since that's how it would be placed in a normal sentence. Or at least that's my understanding of how it's meant to work. I could be wrong though.Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Interesting. Well, I don't think I have seen something like that, but I am going to accept your explanation and scratched out this issue.--12george1 (talk) 16:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
That should be it for now. Anyway, I'm hoping again that you aren't too busy at the National Hurricane Center and are able to fix/address these issues within the next week.--12george1 (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Addressed just about everything here. Replied to a few specifically as well. Thanks for the review, George! Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I will not make you fix the issues that you replied too. Your explanations were good enough to convince me of ignoring those "issues". Anyway, because of the great work you have done, I will now pass this article and list it as a Good Article. Congratulations, --12george1 (talk) 16:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I propose upgrading this article to A-Class. It seems to represent significant research and presents quite a bit of difficult-to-find info in an accessible manner. The writing is overall very solid (I did a bit of minor editing), and the synoptic history shows a good mix of meteorological details and agency observations. Any thoughts? I'd like to see at least a couple other folks in agreement before upping the assessment. – Juliancolton | Talk 03:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Support – Looks pretty free of any major errors. Any errors or suggestions that I took note of I listed below.
In the lead I don't think that late-November 1992 needs the hyphen there. Usually that's only for mid-.
I'm guessing information for impacts in Myanmar was difficult to find with the military junta and all, but are we sure there is no information available there, where Forrest made landfall?
The second of four notable tropical cyclones in the Western Pacific in early November 1992 might have to be cleared up a little. A check with the 1992 Pacific typhoon season article reveals that only three tropical cyclones formed in November in the Western Pacific, and it may be argued that Typhoons Gay and Hunt, which formed on November 14 and 15, respecitvely, did not form "early" in the month.
It may be advantageous to use terms like the next day or the following day so you don't have to keep saying November dd everytime.
It became the first North Indian Ocean cyclone maybe you can replace it with Forrest since you already used it in the sentence preceding that phrase.
Flight 474 lacks on a non-breaking space. :P
regarded as the wost I don't know if I would call Forrest the wost.
In the meteorological history values of measurement are converted manually (as in conversions are spelled out in text) but in the ensuing Preparations and impact section they are done using Template:Convert. This may lead to a few gripes over consistence.
All metric values are converted into customary with the exception of the hectare.
Offshore, waves were estimated to have reached 7 m (23 ft) needs a modifier. In height? Amplitude? λ?
Those are all the qualms I have with this article for A-class discussion. TheAustinMan(Talk·Works) 16:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. I checked newspapers.com and can't find so much as a mention of the storm's onslaught in Myanmar, and with that, plus the ATCR saying there were no reports from the country, I have to believe we're really in the dark. I'll ask CB about the four TCs in November thing. – Juliancolton | Talk 19:26, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
I support as it is now. I'm a little concerned about no Myanmar impact, but I realize that country isn't the best with... info... (at least back then). Regarding November, I believe it includes Elsie, which formed in late October but was strongest in November. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  03:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Any PAGASA Name?
Not per 1992 PTS page. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  21:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
IMD Designation? - BOB 08 - Per the IMD BT present on their website and needs to be mentioned imo.Jason Rees (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Added. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  21:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
The second of four notable tropical cyclones in the Western Pacific in early November 1992 - i dont like using that line to open the MH with especially when i could consider Hunt not notable for instance.Jason Rees (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
The JMA/IMD are not really presented in this article that well - despite being the official warning centers.Jason Rees (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Not sure if this is relevant but Jack Beven mentions Forrest affected southern Bangladesh and Mynamar, with some damage being reported in the coastal regions.Jason Rees (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Is there anything in the MWLs about Forrest, if you need access let me know.Jason Rees (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
The IMD starts the system off as a depression in its BT - worth mentioning imo since the JMA last noted it as a TS (ie 2/3 steps on the IMD intensity scale).Jason Rees (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Theres an interesting discrepancy between the WPAC BT Centers in terms of where it was first noted, CMA, JMA and HKO first note it south of Palawan while JTWC is alone in noting it in Micronesia.Jason Rees (talk) 20:49, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Copyediting comments per standard disclaimer. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk) 

"฿800 million": I think at the first occurrence, MilHist would write "800 million baht", since most of our readers won't know how to pronounce  ฿ until they look it up, but I'm happy to conform to your project's standards.
"plans to relocate up to 2 million people.": Is this an idea people were considering, or were 2 million people actually doing something? If the fact that 600,000 were evacuated more or less covers what actually happened, then I think it weakens the impact of the writing to talk about what people were thinking.
"The India Meteorological Department (IMD) assessed three-minute sustained winds to have been 185 km/h (115 mph)": How do you feel about "The India Meteorological Department (IMD) found three-minute sustained winds of 185 km/h (115 mph),"?
Estimated would be better since they dont go out and find the winds unlike NOAA/Hurricane Hunters.Jason Rees (talk) 13:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Sure, that works for me if it works for you guys. - Dank (push to talk) 14:34, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
"scheduled to travel": I changed this to "traveled".
I'm not sure what "a weekly holiday" is.
These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 13:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)