Talk:Tropical Storm Bilis

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Cyberbot II in topic External links modified
Good articleTropical Storm Bilis 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 9, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 2, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 26, 2006.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Tropical Storm Bilis caused 625 deaths and $2.5 billion (2006 USD) in damage to the Philippines, mainland China, and Taiwan, making it the most damaging storm of the 2006 Pacific typhoon season so far?
Current status: Good article

Todo

edit

I seriously need help cleaning this up, because I'm finding some inconsistencies in the damage reports (the very few of them I can read or otherwise make out). I can't find any indication of 15 billion yuan in damage. The impact section is basically everything Momoko contributed to the season article. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 02:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Never mind, I found some English sources. Looks like this was quite a damaging storm. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 03:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

The maximum wind speeds are inconsistent: 60kt in the infobox and 55kt in the storm history. Otherwise, good job with little information. —Cuiviénen 03:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Whoops. Fixed. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Upped to Mid-class importance; over $1 billion in damages and over 500 deaths is definitely very significant. May even warrant High-class importance, though finding sources for information will be very difficult. —Cuiviénen 15:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Is this a B-class? íslenska hurikein #12 (samtal) 15:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Probably not. There's still some cleanup that needs to be done, and I'm in the process of converting the references to cite web format. Half the ReliefWeb links I used are now dead for whatever reason, so I'm also replacing them with alternative ones. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 00:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
All citations are now in cite web format. I'll be adding a section on the coverup accusations later. I think this could be B-class. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 03:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Impact Pictures

edit

Well, I found some impact pictures, but they're not free. I might need help finding some pictures that are free for us to use. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 10:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Redesignation?

edit

Does anyone think this will be officially declared a typhoon when they review it? (Since there is no real "typhoon season", that could be anytime) CrazyC83 18:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

most likely. íslenska hurikein #12 (samtal) 18:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Quite possibly. PAGASA had this as a 70 kt typhoon, if I recall correctly, so the JMA might do the same. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 21:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

JMA often downgrades a typhoon to STS in post-analysis (such as Utor, Chanthu) but rarely (if not never) upgrades a storm.Momoko

Coverup accusations

edit

Looks like the PRC government is accusing local governments of covering up damage and casualty statistics. Should this be included in the article? --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 00:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

sure. The more the merrier. :P íslenska hurikein #12 (samtal) 02:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
I'm going to wait to see what becomes of this before I add it. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 14:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
Added. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 04:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Good article has passed

edit

An expansion would be good for FA, but nevertheless, the aricle meets the criteria. IolakanaT 20:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

GA Sweeps Review: Pass

edit

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to update the access dates of the website sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 21:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sources

edit

  Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:49, 17 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tropical Storm Bilis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Assessment comment

edit

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tropical Storm Bilis/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Clean up a few references, get MODIS pic if available, expand if possible. Titoxd(?!?) 23:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Last edited at 00:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 09:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tropical Storm Bilis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:32, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply