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 part of WikiProject Vietnam, an attempt to create a comprehensive, neutral, and accurate representation of Vietnam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the
project page.VietnamWikipedia:WikiProject VietnamTemplate:WikiProject VietnamVietnam articles
Dates should not be experessed in "19th". rather use [[<month> 19]], needs general cleanup of grammar and spelling, and needs a PAGASA name.
NSLE01:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)reply
I think, it needs either expansion, or re-merging into the season article. Damn, I need to stop editing, I'm on wikibreak.
NSLE02:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)reply
One; there's more info than in the seasonal article. Two; it's a start class, not a stub, so why should it be merged. Three; it's better than some other WPAC articles, and they havn't been merged. And four; there's still more info to be put in the article, I just haven't had the time and patience to write it.
íslenska hurikein #12(samtal)11:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)reply
I'll bite. 1) Most articles typically have more overall info than the seasonal info. However, there's not always a lot of useful info in the article. The entire impact section could be easily placed in the seasonal article without much changing. 2) Yea, it's a start class. Stubs are for the worst of the worst, and while this isn't the absolute worst, it's still pretty bad. Some parts of the article don't make much sense. 3) The reason it is being considered for merge isn't for the quality. It's because the other WPAC articles that aren't that good at least are written well or were important storms. 4) If there's more info out there, then you should have added it in before publishing it. The article creator needs to prove to us that the article is worthy of being kept, and it needs to be ready when it goes live. I'm not convinced. Unless you add more to the impact section, this should be merged.
Hurricanehink (
talk)
12:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)reply
The intro is not a problem. The problem is the lack of impact. You should use more than one source when writing an article (unisys doesn't really count, as it's just the map).
Hurricanehink (
talk)
22:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)reply
The only reason I proposed a merge was so someone (namely you) would add more to it. That sucks you have to go to the last day of school. I'm done as well today, but since I'm graduating (woohoo! no more high school), I didn't have to go.
Hurricanehink (
talk)
15:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)reply
There; I added a good amount of info about the sinking of the LCU-1563. I'm sure there's a little more info that I didn't include, but I got most of it. Is it a definite keeper now?
íslenska hurikein #12(samtal)17:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)reply