Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1960 North Indian Ocean cyclone season/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:Ian Rose 10:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC).

1960 North Indian Ocean cyclone season

 * Nominator(s): Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The 1960 North Indian Ocean cyclone season marked the beginning of a decade long trend of deadly cyclones in what was then East Pakistan (present day Bangladesh), culminating with the deadliest tropical cyclone on record in 1970. In 1960, East Pakistan was struck by two particularly devastating storms, resulting in over 20,000 fatalities. In light of these storms, the local government sought help from the United States for providing the public with better cyclone preparation plans. Overall, the season featured fifteen depressions, five of which developed into cyclonic storms. The collective loss of life from these systems reached 20,299.

While information is generally scarce, for reasons unknown to me, the India Meteorological Department's annual cyclone report provides sufficient info on all of the year's storms. The article is as comprehensive as can be with the available information. I hope you all enjoy reading this and as always, all thoughts and comments are welcome! Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

All in all pretty good, just some minor things here. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 23:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Right off the bat, I'm confused. The 1960 North Indian Ocean cyclone season featured two deadly tropical cyclones that killed approximately 20,000 people in East Pakistan. - was this 20,000 each, or collectively?
 * The season has no official bounds but cyclones tend to form between April and December. These dates conventionally delimit the period of each year when most tropical cyclones form in the northern Indian Ocean. - since this could be the first NIO season FA, it should set a good standard, meaning I'd love if this was sourced. It also seems to be slightly redundant to what appears later - On average, four to six storms form in the North Indian Ocean every season with dual peaks in activity during May and November. Since the latter sentence is more helpful, I'd cut the first bit. I should note, though, that ref #1 (the IMD one) isn't working for me. Perhaps it's a bad link?
 * Cyclones that occurred between 45°E and 100°E are included in seasonal records by the IMD. - should it be "are" or "were"? The database is technically still ongoing, but they were put in only once, right?
 * I would link the first instance of "cyclonic storms" to cyclonic storm.
 * "The majority of the activity took place in the Bay of Bengal, where eleven systems formed in total. The season's first storm formed over the Arabian Sea on May 10." - I feel like this would work fanjastically if it had a semicolon and "however", or a but, linking the two. I would be so happy about that.
 * "Though it remained over water for its entire existence, several vessels encountered the storm and reported hurricane-force winds accompanied by barometric air pressure of 974 mbar (hPa; 28.77 inHg)." - eek, a bit long. Don't freak out people in the lede with too much text.
 * "The storm producing a 6.1 m (20 ft) storm tide that swept 16 km (10 mi) inland" - "producing" --> "produced"
 * There is a discrepancy between "Severe Cyclonic Storm One" and its infobox calling it a "Very Severe Cyclonic Storm" (which is also how it's mentioned in the timeline).
 * The VSCS and SuCS categories didn't exist at the time. It was merely a Severe Cyclonic Storm with a hurricane core. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That's fine then. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You're inconsistent when you refer to multiple days. I see "May 14 and 17" and "August 8 through August 14".
 * Is "a wave of low pressure" a thing? The next sentence confused me when you said "this upper-level system".
 * "Once onshore, the depression degenerated into a remnant low, the remnants which persisted until August 28 when they were absorbed into a trough over Rajasthan Pradesh." - a general complaint of the article is that you have some shorter sentences that could easily be merged.
 * "and Uttar Pradeshes" - if you're doing the plural, I think it should be lowercase "pradeshes" (and maybe link?)
 * Depression Seven has - "to $9.2 million" - but the source says $9.24. I'd add the extra decimal place. However, the infobox for the whole article says $9.4 million. And nowhere does it say it's in 1960 USD, or any other currency.
 * "An estimated 6,000 people perished " - was this overall?
 * "by the nation's poor infrastructure" - East Pakistan wasn't a nation though. I'd get rid of "nation" to simplify matters.
 * I'd link storm surge earlier than SCS 10.
 * Were there actual "tidal waves"?
 * "Offshore, these waves were estimated at 12.2 m (40 ft); though they significantly decreased before impacting land." - any reason you used semicolon and not comma?
 * UN provides some updated death tolls for storms 9 and 10.
 * "Cittagong" - typo? It should be Chittagong.
 * Is the "tropical wave" mentioned in the final storm a typical tropical wave?
 * The link to List of notable tropical cyclones in the see also section goes to List of tropical cyclone records. Is there a reason that is there?


 * Comment The lead says, "These systems marked the start of an unusually active period of cyclones impacting East Pakistan, culminating ten years later with the 1970 Bhola cyclone, which killed between 300,000 and 500,000" But this is not mentioned in the body of the article. This needs to be there somewhere, perhaps towards the end?--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Normally something like that would go in a season summary section, but there's not enough information available to support one. I felt it more appropriate to keep it in the lead than just let it sit in a stubby section alone. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Delegate comment -- Open for over a month and no commentary for a couple of weeks, this review has stalled and will be archived shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 14:03, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.