This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
project page for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a
WikiProject dedicated to coverage of
Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the
project page, or contribute to the
project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
You're stuck with me again. Aren't you lucky. Well, let's get started:
1. Well written:
a. prose/copyright: QuestionNeeds workAcceptable
- If the storm was last seen in the Sea of Japan, how was the Soviet Union effected? The last sentence in the lead and the last paragraph of the article seem to contradict one another.
There's nothing within available sources to explain this; however, from satellite imagery I could see a band of heavy rain extending to the north of Judy that would be the likely culprit.
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
13:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)reply
- That would be OR, so we need some sort of concrete tie. I can see the pdf confirming that it disappated in the Sea of Japan, I can't see the sources that say anything about the Soviet Union. I'd have to see them before I make any recommendations. Please tell me how to get them, or send them to me.
- Do you consider yourself proficient at the high school level or above in both Japanese and Korean? If not, how did you translate the pieces in those languages (machine or ask-a-friend)? How sure are you of the reliability of that method? Are there comprable English language replacements? Note that none of these questions require you to change anything, at least not now, however I'd like for you to answer them before I promote.
To be honest, I'm at the whim of google translate. The only potential issue would be with the Korean sources since Digital Typhoon is available in English (I used the Japanese source since that's the original site). I'm always careful about adding information obtained through google translate and if something seems out of place, I wont add it. In most cases I'll also make sure there are multiple sources supporting a statement (which is harder for older events).
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
13:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)reply
- That is exactly the opposite of the answer I wanted to hear. I need to think on this, although one thing I would say is that if multiple sources that you're using confirm a given fact, then you should source that fact to at least two of the multiple sources.
The one citing the rainfall is easy to verify since it's numeric. I'm currently looking for someone fluent in Korean to translate the other two sources to verify the google translate info.
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
02:53, 10 January 2012 (UTC)reply
Just got a response on one
"태풍 ‘쥬디’ 발생 :이재민 47,000명 긴급구호, 이동급식소 운영"
"Hurricane "Judy": provided emergency relief and mobile soup kitchen for 47,000 victims "
- How did you get access to the Japan Economic Newswire sources? If you accessed them over the web through LexisNexis or a similar source, that should be noted so that people can follow the trail (paywall not withstanding).
- Err... no. That dosen't really help. To be blunt, it's not your job to care if it is behind a paywall or not, it's your job to detail exactly where you got it from. Saying "behind paywall" isn't helpful. Instead, find a way to link to the LexisNexis webpages, in the source itself. People will click and hit a paywall, or they'll have access and bypass the paywall, but what's important is that they can click to get to it.
- Then we should replace the "behind paywall" with the repository. You could go with "Accessed through LexisNexis" or something like that. Apologoies for all the confusion, I didn't know direct linking wasn't possible.
c. no original research: QuestionNeeds workAcceptable
- I've seen translations go pretty badly, so I really want to see the answer to that the first part of the question at 2a answered before I mark off 2c.
- Converted to "Needs work" because of the Soviet issue in 1a.
- Resolved
3. Broad in coverage: Section acceptable
a. covers main aspects: Acceptable
b. focused/on topic: Acceptable
4. Neutral: Section acceptable
5. Stable: Section acceptable
- I'm not comfortable with articles just sprouting up over the course of a few days, only ever being seen by the writer and one or two other people. However since this was started in December and someone else tweaked it then, before this expansion, I'm not going to ask for the article to have a short fallow period before the promotion.
6. Image use: Section acceptable
a. license/tagging correct: Acceptable
- I swapped out the third image because the one previously there is, while probably acceptable, less clearly licensed than the one I replaced it with.
b. relevant/properly captioned: Acceptable
7. Additional items not required for a GA, but requested by the reviewer
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Typhoon Judy (1989). 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.