Talk:Cyclone Onil

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleCyclone Onil 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
August 23, 2010Good article nomineeListed

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cyclone Onil/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricanehink (talk) 02:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Writing is overall decent, but could be better to put the article over the top. Examples for fixing include avoiding split infinitives, not too much passive voice,

  • "However, dry air quickly entered the system, causing it to rapidly weaken, degrading to a depression just off the coast of Gujarat, India." - you shouldn't have two participles in the same sentence, it looks bad.
Done Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Over the following several days, the system took a slow, erratic track towards the south-southeast before turning northeastward and making landfall near Porbandar on October 10 and dissipating." - it's a bit long-winded, particular since there are three participles! Try and clear it up.
Done Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Offshore, 300 fishermen are believed to have gone missing during the storm and no reports have stated their status since Onil's passage." - could use some more punctuation or tweaking.
Done Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • More importantly, what's the status on the 300 missing fishermen? That's a pretty significant detail that's not resolved, whether they were killed or not.
I've searched all over for this, I have no idea where they went. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "situated roughly 463 km (288 mi)" - why the exact numbers? Normally such distances are rounded to the nearest 5.
Fixed Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think the naming details should be in the MH... what do you think?
Better there than in the unwanted "naming" section which most of the project voted against. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any reason the "100 kilometres" in the last sentence of the second paragraph is not converted? And why is kilometres written out?
Probably wrote it on a different day, fixed it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just curious, is there any meteorological reason that the system moved away from land after it nearly dissipated? Also, was it forecast to restrengthen when it redeveloped into a TD?
No info available on that. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Within hours of moving inland, Onil dissipated early on October 10" - that sentence doesn't sit well with me, since there are two different references to time. Could you fix that, if you understand what I'm talking about?
I'm not sure what you're talking about actually... Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, "within" refers to a specific time, but then you have another reference to time which is much more important. Something like "Early on October 10, Onil dissipated over India, several hours after moving inland." --Hurricanehink (talk) 22:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The remnants of the cyclone brought light to moderate rainfall in India" - does this refer to the system's trek the first or second time around?
Specified Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "an estimated 150,000 acres of land" - could you convert?
Converted Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Pakistan paragraph has really bad organization. There's one sentence on the deaths, then one on flooding and downed power lines, then one on other deaths, then another about power in the region. Could you reorganize the data for better flow?
Reorganized
  • "port officials stated that it was now safe for fishermen" - you should avoid "now", unless you use it as a quote, since "now" is six years after the storm :P
  • I guess :P

That's it for now. I'm putting the GA nomination on hold. --Hurricanehink (talk) 02:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review Hink, I found it very helpful :) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I responded to the one comment (which I hope you understand now), but it's not significant enough. Therefore, I'll pass the GA nomination. --Hurricanehink (talk) 22:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cyclone Onil. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 11:03, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cyclone Onil. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Name Onil in Bengali?[edit]

The name "Onil" was submitted by Bangladesh, which speaks and writes Bengali/Bangla বাংলা. How would someone write "Onil" in Bangla script? Also, how to write the other Bangladesh-submitted names Ogni, Nisha, Giri, Helen, Chapala, Ockhi, and Fani? SilSinn9821 (talk) 04:04, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Forget it, I just found my answer in the Thai Wiktionary: ภาคผนวก:รายชื่อพายุหมุนเขตร้อนในมหาสมุทรอินเดียเหนือในภาษาไทย SilSinn9821 (talk) 06:02, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cyclone_Onil&oldid=1211217143"