Talk:Typhoon Mawar (2005)

Redirecting back to season article

I got a bit suspicious after noticing the 1-min winds had been adjusted up to 130 kt by User:HurricaneParrot when they created this article, despite the JTWC best track (both in ATCR and IBTrACS form) stating only 125 kt. Since they also had a history of copyright problems (which led to them socking to avoid scrutiny and eventually getting blocked), I decided to comb through the sources and see if there were any more issues here, and found the following:

• Close paraphrasing from Gary Padgett's August 2005's Monthly Global Tropical Cyclone Summary
  • On August 18, an area of convection persisted, about 170 nm to the southeast of Iwo Jima. (from article) vs On 18 August an area of convection persisted approximately 170 nm southeast of Iwo Jima. (from source)
  • In many oil refineries in eastern Japan, Mawar briefly forced the suspension of ship berthing operations. (from article) vs Offshore, Mawar temporarily forced the suspension of vessel berthing operations at a number of oil refineries in eastern Japan. (from source)
• Numerous instances of failed verification
  • Located in a favorable environment, the disturbance organized is not in the JTWC ATCR cited
  • The remnants of Mawar persisted for three more days, before eventually dissipated on August 30 is not in Gary Padgett's summary and the JMA best track actually states September 1
  • some farmers harvested their crops to avoid further damages as the typhoon passes is not in Gary Padgett's summary
  • The Central Japan Railway Company prepared a nap train for those who cannot go to their homes due to the bullet trains getting suspended is not in the JMA report
  • Over 23,000 households in these areas also reported power outages due to downed utility poles is not in the JMA report
  • In the Nishiizu town, the Shizuoka Prefectural Road No. 59, Ito Nishiizu Line was destroyed due to heavy flooding is not in the JMA report
  • The Hakone Station at Kanagawa reported its record-breaking rainfall, at 528 mm is not in Gary Padgett's summary; the JMA report does mention that total but does not call it "record-breaking"
  • Two individuals were killed due to unknown reasons is not in Gary Padgett's summary, which states one death and seven injuries
• No source in the article mentions anything about the Nagareyama Fireworks Display

With all that, at least half the article's content is questionable and perhaps even straight up false. I'm electing to redirect back to 2005 Pacific typhoon season#Typhoon Mawar, and any future recreation should be rewritten from scratch to avoid reintroducing the above problems. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 09:18, 22 May 2023 (UTC)