# Talk:Typhoon Agnes (1981)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Agnes (1981)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk · contribs) 16:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

This USAID source from 1993 says 113 deaths and $134 million in damage in South Korea alone
I keep forgetting this document exists, thanks. Added the info in. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
"A further 14 lives were lost in China were coastal flooding" - given this is right after the Taiwan sentence, you should say "mainland China" or "eastern China", due to the political nature of Taiwan/China. Also, did you mean "where" instead of "were"? In this sentence, don't use "resulting" twice
"an Tropical Upper Tropospheric Trough (TUTT)" - grammar. It should be "a"
"Following improvement in the convective structure" - comma
"Additionally due to its proximity to the Philippines the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration dubbed the system with the local name Pining." - this sentence is a bit messy. Maybe remove the first word, and add a comma after the first Philippines?
Why is "Southwestern" capitalized?
'169 km (105 mi) - why so exact?
Stupid convert template is stupid :P Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
" Subsequent slowing of the cyclone's forward speed as it turned northward resulted in an extended period of heavy rain for much of South Korea. " - this whole sentence just seems a tad superfluous and flowery, my good sir. Perchance could you rejigger this fine prose and make it suitable for thine eyes of lesser compadres?
Is it really that bad? D: I rather liked that sentence.... :( Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
"After over the Sea of Okhotsk" - eh?
Maybe indicate "Kamchatka Peninsula" is in Russia?
Don't say Taiwan twice in the first sentence of "China and Taiwan"
I think the redlink "Pintung" is supposed to be Pingtung City
In the second paragraph of "China and Taiwan", you should probably indicate you're talking about mainland China now. Speaking of that sentence, the bit about spring tide just seems like an afterthought, although it seems more important when you mention that in the lead. Try rewording, perhaps?
It seems necessary to note it in the lead so the storm isn't given undue weight to the event but there isn't much mention of it otherwise in the sources. I think it's fine as-is. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Whenever you mention acres in this article, you should also indicate hectares as a conversion.
"Most of the deaths resulted from landslides, swollen rivers, collapsed embankments." - add "and"
"7.5 billion won" - USD?
All in all a good read! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  16:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, Hink! I've made most of the corrections and just had a few rebuttals to comments of yours :P Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)