# Talk:Typhoon Surigae

Has PAGASA has named Surigae as Bising? In the bulletin it says that it is still outside the PAR (Philippines Area of Responsibility). Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 02:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Beraniladri19, yes  HurricaneEdgar  03:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
TROPICAL CYCLONE UPDATE
7:00 AM, 16 April 2021
At 6:20 AM today, Severe Tropical Storm "SURIGAE" entered the Philippine Area of Responsibility and was assigned the domestic name "BISING". Severe Weather Bulletins will be issued beginning at 11:00 AM today.  HurricaneEdgar  03:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, creator of this page and other members of storm pages.
I created a new page on Wikipedia Brazil about this storm.
We hope that we can contribute together. André L P Souza (talk) 16:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

So someone has put in the infobox that Surigae attained 1-min sustained wind speeds of 170kts? The trackfile only states that it peaked at 165kts. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

JTWC said it peaked at 165 kt, possibly because they never went above T7.5.  JavaHurricane 02:19, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/dzbb/status/1384007280899678212?s=19
1 confirmed dead in Southern Leyte, 1 missing in Northern Samar so far
Is this a good source?
I wouldn’t say that’s a good source, try finding a news source, I’ve seen a few. I’ll try to add that in when I have the available time.DachshundLover82 (talk) 13:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

DZBB is a reliable source, but using Twitter as a citation for something already widely covered in non-SPS websites is heavily discouraged. An article from DZBB's parent network, GMA, is a better source and is available on their news website. There's also already reports of a second death in Cebu. Might as well use an up-to-date source than this Twitter one. Chlod (say hi!) 13:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I have news from MetSul Meteorology that reports that this typhoon is absorbing sulfur dioxide and other smoke particles from the volcano André L P Souza (talk) 17:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@André L P Souza: Do you have a link to that? Chlod (say hi!) 18:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Chlod Yes, I will send.  And sorry, the correct name for the volcano is La Soufrière. The language is Brazilian Portuguese: https://metsul.com/gases-do-vulcao-la-soufriere-encontram-supertufao-surigae/ André L P Souza (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

André L P Souza,  Just verify this source, I found nothing related Volcano La Soufrière and Typhoon Surigae in Google. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
In the news, the photo was taken by a volcanist. And the fact is reported in the news.  Did you click on the news?
It counts as news, Beraniladri19? André L P Souza (talk) 19:54, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I know that but other than this article no other news article has posted something like that. That's what I'm saying. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 06:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I have a question could we use this satellite loop of Surigae around the time reaching peak intensity for the preparations area of the article? Because this is the only satellite loop of Typhoon Surigae when it was approaching the Philippines at the time Wikihelp7586 (talk) 17:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Wikihelp7586: yes you can do that, I have seen in other articles too. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 17:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
@Beraniladri19: thanks Wikihelp7586 (talk) 18:02, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Surigae didn’t become annular!
It still had some intense banding, CDO wasn’t donut most of the time and eye isn’t really a characteristic.
The officials didn’t call it annular either. Use the officials and not Washington post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.104.121 (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2021 (UTC) 

@86.18.104.121: do you have a source ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 05:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Just to clarify... that Washington Post article was written by Matthew Cappucci, a meteorologist with a bachelor's degree in atmospheric sciences at Harvard University. Pretty sure that's a reliable source. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

We cannot possibly use this image in current use. 
I tried uploading an image but it didn't work. 
Any suggestions for images we can use other than this one? 🌀AwesomeHurricaneBoss🌀 13:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@AwesomeHurricaneBoss: And why, praytell? @Hurricaneboy23 and FleurDeOdile: You two must discuss here before further changes to the image as per WP:BRD.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
"We cannot POSSIBLY use this image in current use." How is this image unusuable? It seems perfectly fine and especially better than those unrealistic infrared images overlayed on top of a Blue Marble background (which are always on a lower level than grayscale visible images over the ocean, also stated in our WikiProject's image guidelines), so this seems a bit dramatic. Also, I'd rather not get into an unnecessary argument between images with FleurDeOdile for the same reason that got him into WP:ANI in the first place. We've already disclosed that true color images are better in general. Also, judging by the quality of your previous images you have uploaded to commons, I'm not 100-percent sure one of those would be suitable for this article (not to be rude!) Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 17:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@Hurricaneboy23: Totally those infrared ones are unrealistic, I agree. I was thinking like one of the images that were late in the evening on November 7 in true-color. 🌀AwesomeHurricaneBoss🌀 10:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Should there be a MH article for Surigae (Bising), considering it's long life? ~~ 🌀𝚂𝙲𝚂 𝙲𝙾𝚁𝙾𝙽𝙰🌀 13:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Super Cyclonic Storm Corona: No. Longevity of a storm is not what determines the need for a separate meteorological history article. See WP:SPLIT for size guidelines on when to split.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Yeah. Only storms like Dorian 2019, Patricia 2015, and Laura 2020 deserve MH articles. 🌀AwesomeHurricaneBoss🌀 10:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, so Typhoon Surigae is now an extratropical cyclone, but why isn't it considered dissipated yet ? JMA, JTWC have published their last advisory. Can you guys explain in detail ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 08:16, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Surigae is extratropical but it is technically still active. If the low is circling around then the storm is still active. If you look at satellite imagery, Surigae's low is still active. 🌀AwesomeHurricaneBoss🌀 12:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@AwesomeHurricaneBoss: No, but every official and unofficial warning agencies have published their last bulletin. Still it is considered active just because in satellite imagery it is showing active as an extratropical low ? I can't understand this, pls explain in detail. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 15:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Beraniladri19: I havent looked at Surigae in detail but would note that a system hasnt dissipated, because the JMA, JTWC etc called it extratropical. Hell extratropical cyclones can still have signficant impacts on land and there was some talk of Surigae having some impact on the West Coast of America last week.Jason Rees (talk) 17:04, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Tbh, I barely understand why the editors keep saying that it is still active. We're going on three weeks now of Surigae being "active", and now there is proof that Surigae is dissipated. 🌀AwesomeHurricaneBoss🌀 17:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
No. Surigae is still active. "Dissipated" means dead. Completely dead. Not extratropical, a remnant low, a remnant circulation, a trough, or anything else. Dead. Surigae isn't dead yet. Not even close. In fact, I can clearly pick it out on satellite imagery and wind maps, such as this one. The storm is weakening, but it's still very much alive right now, near the Aleutian Islands. The JMA and the OPC are still tracking the storm. Until they issue their final bulletins, the storm should NOT be marked as dissipated. In storm articles, we use the full dissipation date, instead of using the date when the storm stopped being tropical (which we use in the season articles). I will report anyone who reverts this again. This is one of the dumbest edit wars I have ever seen. But I will personally end it if I have to. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 18:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@LightandDark2000: Okay...... I see the point, but which link they are publishing the bulletin of the Surigae's extratropical low ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 04:24, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello all, I've been tracking the remnants of Surigae - Bising over at Windy.com and as you can see for yourselves, it's affecting the British Columbia coast — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.27.174 (talk) 00:48, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

cause i found the photo in peak intensity on wikimedia commons so i want to help 180.195.116.90 (talk) 01:37, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Is it possible to add the extratropical part of Surigae's track that was based on the best track from JMA? I feel that it's necessary to use it to be able to show how its extratropical remnants reached Alaska, not just basing from the text shown. Writer-ian26 (talk) 06:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Surigae/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: JayTee32 (talk · contribs) 01:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 21:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Since I remember this storm well, and recently had a GAN, I figured I would review this. 

Just curious what you're using to cite Surigae being the strongest cyclone worldwide that year
I personally didn't add that detail but I think someone got that from the Tropical cyclones in 2021 page (which doesn't cite a source for Surigae being the most intense worldwide, as most of those pages don't unfortunately). There is this source where Surigae's minimum pressure is lower than any other storm worldwide in 2021, but I'm worried using it to say Surigae was the strongest overall may be WP:SYNTH. Removing for now. JayTee⛈️ 22:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
I found a source, just google "STATE OF THE CLIMATE IN 2021" from American Meteorological Society. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  02:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
@Hurricanehink Added. JayTee⛈️ 00:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
"The second named storm, first typhoon and first super typhoon of the 2021 Pacific typhoon season, Surigae originated from a low-pressure area south of the Micronesian island of Woleai that organized into a tropical depression on April 12" - that's a really long sentence, especially because you're specifying which Micronesian island it was near.
Cut it down. JayTee⛈️ 23:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
"and was named Surigae by the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)" - could you pipe link tropical cyclone naming here when you mention the storm being named?
Linked —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
"1-minute sustained winds of 315 km/h (196 mph)" - why isn't the mph rounded?
Rounded —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
"This made it the strongest pre-May typhoon on record." - this duplicates the beginning of the first lead paragraph, in the same paragraph. I suggest simplifying the met history so it's only one paragraph in the lead. Starting the second lead paragraph with "Afterward" doesn't work too well for flow, since you might have to go back to see what it's after. Considering the size of the article, I think a two paragraph lead is fine.
Merged two paragraphs, will trim first one. JayTee⛈️ 23:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
"The subtropical system subsequently underwent extratropical transition, which it completed by April 24." - why does the infobox say April 25 then?
Corrected date —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
You should link US dollar somewhere in the lead, or leave a note when you mention the first damage total.
US dollar already linked. —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
It should be linked on its first usage, not second. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  18:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
I had already done that, but it was undone by the nominator. Now it should be linked on the first usage. —JCMLuis 💬 19:21, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Made a mistake when I was resolving an edit conflict, thanks for fixing that. JayTee⛈️ 23:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
I think you could expand on the Philippines impact in the lead a bit more.
Added detail to second lead paragraph. JayTee⛈️ 00:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
"On April 17, the JMA determined that Surigae's barometric pressure had rapidly fallen to 895 hPa (mbar; 26.43 inHg), as the storm reached its peak intensity." - on what basis? The average reader might be curious how an official agency determines a storm's strength.
To be honest I'm not sure what to link or add there, any suggestions? JayTee⛈️ 00:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Check the advisories, the JMA explains things in their Prognostic Reasonings. There's a very important word in there, which is how most storm intensities are estimated, but I want to see if you can find it. That's a way of incorporating more met info into the article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  18:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Added and linked that the pressure was determined by the Dvorak technique. Cited a JMA prog reasoning. JayTee⛈️ 02:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Otherwise good job writing up the Met history
" In Palau, 350 people were sheltered, as 18 public schools were open as storm shelters" - could you rewrite it so it doesn't say "shelter" twice?
Rewrote sentence. —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
" ₱1.5 billion (US$31.05 million) worth of standby funds were prepared for disaster response." - in general, you should avoid a sentence if it starts with a number or a symbol, which could be confusing in this case if someone isn't a native English reader. Not a necessity to fix, just something I noticed.
Adjusted. JayTee⛈️ 00:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
"There was criticism for the lack of news coverage on the typhoon in Palau most notably." - notably what?!
I removed this sentence as I felt making such a broad claim of criticism with only one source wasn't warranted. Also removed unnecessary repetitive citations. JayTee⛈️ 00:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
"; the search continues for another missing seven crew members" - continues... into 2025? This needs to be fixed.
Removed statement pending future research on whereabouts of those crew members. JayTee⛈️ 00:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
"around 345 km (214 mi) to" - round the second unit
Rounded —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
"Widespread rainfall totals of up to 8–12 inches (200–300 mm) " - make sure units are in metric first, not imperial. It happened elsewhere
Flipped units —JCMLuis 💬 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Was there any update or clarification about the missing people? Surely they would've been declared dead by now. Check PAGASA year-end summaries, or WMO reports.
The 2021 PAGASA summary has 9 dead and no one missing, and doesn't mention the LCU Cebu Great Ocean. I didn't find a WMO report on the storm. The Typhoon Committee report on 2021 is also silent on the issue. JayTee⛈️ 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Then the confirmed death toll is nine. If PAGASA didn't mention the specifics of the deaths, then you can assume that's the LCU Cebu Great Ocean. I'm not sure where you're getting the death toll of ten. Ref 83 says four deaths. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  18:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
I removed the mentions of the missing crew members and put the death toll as nine total in line with the PAGASA summary. JayTee⛈️ 02:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Any impacts in Alaska?
Nothing from my informal Google research. JayTee⛈️ 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Otherwise, the article is pretty good! Lemme know if you have any questions. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  21:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink all points have been addressed or responded to. JayTee⛈️ 00:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm afraid this sentence at Meteorological History is unsourced:
Afterward, Surigae's remnant continued moving eastward while gradually weakening, turning northeastward on May 1. On May 2, Surigae's remnant was absorbed into another extratropical cyclone, just south of the Alaskan Panhandle. RFNirmala (talk) 02:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh yea I missed this. @JayTee32:? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  18:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
@Hurricanehink Still struggling to find a source for this, not sure who added that detail. Resolved your other two points. JayTee⛈️ 02:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Do you think it's best to remove it then? I'm not comfortable passing a GA review with unsourced material. You could mention that the JMA last mentioned the storm on April 30th, per the Best Track, and leave it at that. I did some Googling myself, and found more info about Surigae's waves in Hawaii than any effects in Alaska. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  18:59, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
@Hurricanehink: I've removed that part since the person who added it didn't add a source. —JCMLuis 💬 13:27, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Surigae 2021-04-17 0800Z.jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:10, 29 September 2025 (UTC)