Talk:Typhoon Lupit (2003)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 09:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

First off, thanks for the review. Not everyone is into tropical cyclones as much as I am, so I appreciate the effort.

For that "variety of unfavorable...", I was going for something more generic in the lede, but per your suggestion, I explained what they were. As far as the movement, it says "it moved generally to the west or west-southwest". It's not moving in two directions at once, just alternating. Granted, it's not a huge deal. I'll change it if you want, but I don't think it's problematic. Similar with the flight cancellations bit. The damage wasn't major in Japan, and the rainfall resulted in both mudslides and flight cancellations. Does that make sense, then? In that sentence about the outflow, I changed "cycling" to "pulsating", as I think that was the most confusing word in there. Let me know if that needs further tweaking. Regarding the flights being delivered, it refers to something earlier in the sentence with the delivery of water to the islands. Should I add "the water" to say "60% of the flight of water", or something? I thought "wrecked" was a fine word to use, just synonymous with destroyed. I didn't care much either way, so I changed the wording. Hope that works. I added "several" to the first sentence of the article (not as big of a fan of the word "many").

Lemme know if any of that still needs to be done, and thanks again :) --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 20:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with all those Hurricanehink. I just added a few more issues to the list, but shouldn't be too hard to fix. Retrolord (talk) 08:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool. I changed "gusty" to "tropical storm-force winds", but I did not remove the sentence that mentions specific "gusts". A gust is a meteorological term that is more specific than the vague "winds". It is accurate to say Lupit threatened Japan, because it could have made landfall; it did not, however. I used the wording based off the source, as it's not certain whether the storm 13 years prior struck Japan, caused damage, or merely threatened. Regarding the roofs bit, it specifies how the damage was mostly to roofs, and not to the rest of the building. Lastly, about the end of the lede, I clarified "there" [Japan] to show it is different from the FSM impact. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:18, 7 February 2013 (UTC)