Talk:Typhoon Rai

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Typhoon Rai article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A news item involving Typhoon Rai was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 19 December 2021.

Wikipedia

This article is written in Philippine English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, realize, center, travelled) and some terms that are used in it (including jeepney and cyberlibel) may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Weather: Tropical / Western Pacific Mid‑importance

	Weather portal 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. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific typhoon work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Tambayan Philippines Mid‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines 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.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Disaster management Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A better blurb needed

{{ITN note}} for the In the news for the Main Page :GSMC(Chief Mike) Kouklis U.S.NAVY Ret. ⛮🇺🇸 / 🇵🇭🌴^⍨talk 17:26, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from Arthur Yap

Is there a way to include the English translation within the quote box? Would it be suitable to put it in parentheses before the full stop, like in the GMA News article? ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update current storm information at the end of the article to CAT 5

Yes 122.104.176.109 (talk) 21:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done already HurricaneEdgar 23:34, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hello. I need help, I cant change the image. The following image that I want to use is "2021 CIMSS 28W Twentyeigh visible infrared satellite loop.gif" — Preceding unsigned comment added by LastManWalking (talk • contribs) 05:41, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Addition

Can we add the Southern Ryukyu Islands to the areas affected by the typhoon? Hanami-Sakura (talk) 10:32, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Micronesia, Palau, Hong Kong, Macau

@HurricaneEdgar: Would you please inform why my edits have to be reverted? Thanks. 116.92.226.239 (talk) 10:37, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hey you are Hong Kong IP user reason they need to rv per the LTA HurricaneEdgar 10:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Practically all non-registered editors from this place are now labelled LTAs. So were my edits problematic by themselves? I'm sure you are able to tell aren't you? 116.92.226.239 (talk) 10:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

as per In Long term-abuse 'Instructions Revert and report to WP:AIV. When reporting, please link to this long-term abuse report. When the active abuse has been taken care of, please update this report with the latest information. HurricaneEdgar 10:44, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's hilarious. An editor started to label all non-registered editors from Hong Kong as LTAs some time ago over content dispute, and then two other editors echoed. That's it. (We've gotta ask who're abusing and are the warriors here.) I'd assume you are most capable to tell whether my edits to this article about Rai were problematic or not. 116.92.226.239 (talk) 10:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Before a Image war happens

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

That's a clear consensus—image 2 shall be restored to the infobox. (non-admin closure) --Dylan620 (he/him · talk · edits) 22:51, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image 1	Image 2

I know a image war is inevitable and I know us in the WikiProject Tropical cyclones community are sick of debating these, but we need a consensus before a image war does happen. So which peak image of Rai should we use in the main infobox, personally me I won't mind (Neutral) if we use one or the other in both these images Rai was at or around the same intensity. Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Destroyeraa: ADT and a warmer eye suggests it was stronger at the later peak. The eye is clearer as well. We should thus use image 1.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:49, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh come on not another edit war. By the way, I choose Image 1 as it has a clearer eye. Hurricane 4235 🌀 02:22, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2. Image one is a grayscale image, and per WP:WPTC/IMG, "high-resolution true-color visible imagery" holds precedence over "grayscale visible or infrared imagery." Secondly, also per the aforementioned image guideline, "the most iconic image of the storm" is first in the order of precedence for images. The most iconic image of the storm. If such an image exists, it should be used as the main infobox image. Most of the time there will be no exceptions (unless a new image proposed is a significant improvement.) It should always be a high-quality, true-color, visible satellite image. Finally, we cannot make our own assumptions on intensity based on our own interpretation of Dvorak estimates and satellite imagery. Both the JMA and JTWC state that the first and second peaks had the same intensity (105 kt 10-minute; 140 kt 1-minute). Destroyeraa (Alternate account) 02:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2 – images are of the storm at very similar intensities. Rai/Odette had significant impacts in the Philippines, and most of the news coverage of this system concerns its impacts there, so accordingly the image of the storm approaching the Philippines should take precedence. —TheAustinMan^{(Talk ⬩ Edits)} 03:04, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2 per TheAustinMan -- HurricaneEdgar 03:22, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2 per User:Destroyeraa. --The Space Enthusiast (talk) 03:56, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2 since the typhoon had major impact in the Philippines, as per TheAustinManHariboneagle927 (talk) 04:27, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2 looks a hell of a lot cleaner and colorized than the first one. Yeah I know the first is the peak but to keep up with the constancy, I prefer the second unless we get a second peak that's colorized. Flasty Jam (talk) 14:52, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Image 2 is better and should be used. Highlights a much more significant point of Rai's lifetime shortly before landfall, compared to its less significant/impressive second peak out to sea (see also: most iconic image section in WP:WPTC/IMG) In addition its colorized and higher resolution, which according to the IMG guidelines it already is preferred by a long shot. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/201414/japan-gives-aid-to-typhoon-odette-survivors-in-ph 68.68.165.8 (talk) 00:19, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:09, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done with Special:Diff/1062882858. @ScottishFinnishRadish: I think the change to be done here is quite obvious — you should try looking for the context of an edit request first and carry it out in the spirit of the request rather than declining it if it didn't fit the "change X to Y" format. Chlod (say hi!) 01:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've discussed this a number of times with other users, and the general consensus is that it should be in the x to y format. This makes it much easier on those of us who patrol edit requests. Closing the request doesn't remove it, and any talk page watchers are more than able to review the request, and make the edit if they know what should be done, as I assume happened here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish: The request had not lasted more than an hour and was already marked as answered in that short period of time. There's less incentive for the aforementioned parties to carry out the request if it had already been marked as answered. Perhaps it is the goal of edit request patrollers to keep the backlog down, but I really don't think an hour is enough for any talk page watcher (or other patrollers, in fact) to respond to the edit request knowing the full context of the request to be done. Chlod (say hi!) 01:28, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion and update of International response section

The International response section needs to be updated. Can somebody expand the section? The following sources may be useful:

–Sanglahi86 (talk) 11:32, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Rai called Super Typhoon Odette in PH?

Is Odette supposed to be categorized as Typhoon only?
Based on my understanding, the new storm classification by PAGASA doesn't mention that any typhoons in the past that have wind speeds applicable to get a super typhoon category based on the revised statement can be categorized as a Super Typhoon in the Philippines.^[1]

I know that they'll still be called upon the original classification they had and PAGASA most certainly will only apply this new and revised storm categorization to upcoming tropical cyclones. They even kept records of the previous typhoons through their website but the categories look the same as it is before the revision of the storm categories by PAGASA. ^[2] ^[3]

This means that the Super Typhoon category with the name Odette doesn't make sense for Filipino wiki readers like me and just creates some misinformation to people who depends on Wikipedia for information online.

- Epic Lance 84 (talk) 12:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Epic Lance 84: Wikipedia provides information from an international perspective. The PAGASA is not the Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre assigned by the World Meteorological Organization for the Western Pacific basin. The Japan Meteorological Agency is. It's longstanding procedure to name an article based on the official name given by the JMA (i.e. the international name) and to use a simplified category name (thus our articles on severe tropical storms only begin with "Tropical Storm"). In addition, the JMA does not have a super typhoon category, so we're not allowed to use that category in the article title in the first place. There's no misinformation here: we're just using different names for the same thing. Chlod (say hi!) 12:56, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I was talking about the "known in the Philippines" article text in Typhoon Rai's Wiki article not the entire thing if you're confused.
Epic Lance 84 (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also I'm gonna mention that the Typhoon Rai article said this: "On March 23, 2022, PAGASA revised their tropical cyclone scale. Rai (Odette) was considered as a super typhoon". This also a part of the misinfo I was talking about because PAGASA never declared Odette as a Super Typhoon in the Philippines and also didn't make a statement about this and the revised storm categorization of PAGASA was only meant for the current typhoon season in the Philippines (2022) and for the upcoming typhoon seasons.

Epic Lance 84 (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

[1] ttps://www.manilatimes.net/2022/03/24/news/pagasa-revises-definitions-of-storm-signals-super-typhoon/1837462

[2] ttps://pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/tamss/weather/tc2021.png

[3] ttps://bagong.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/learning-tools/public-storm-warning-signal

[1]

[2]

[3]