Typhoon Mujigae is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
	Typhoon Mujigae 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 Date Process Result June 24, 2021 Good article nominee Listed April 10, 2022 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. China Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Tambayan Philippines 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Weather: Tropical / Western Pacific Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. 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).

Text and/or other creative content from this version of User:KN2731/Mujigae was copied or moved into Typhoon Mujigae with this edit on 15:08, 27 May 2021. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Typhoon Mujigae. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WWJP25-RJTD_201509300000.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WTPN31-PGTW_201510010300.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WTPQ20-RJTD_201510011800.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WTPN31-PGTW_201510011500.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WDPN31-PGTW_201510012100.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WDPN31-PGTW_201510020900.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WTPQ20-RJTD_201510021800.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WTPN31-PGTW_201510031300.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gwydir.demon.co.uk/advisories/WTPQ20-RJTD_201510031200.htm

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: 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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The track of the storm tracked the typhoon was Category 3 typhoon, why the articles tracked it reached Cat 4 as the last forecast (JTWC) on Oct 4, 2015? 14.167.133.68 (talk) 12:27, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Mujigae is listed as a Cat 4 typhoon with 1-minute sustained wind-speeds of 115 kts in the JTWC's post storm analysis. However, since it peaked on October 4th at 03z or in between the 6-hourly synoptic times, the person generating the track map may have ignored it or missed the 3 hourly point. Either @Meow: or @Supportstorm: will be able to explain more or possibly redo the track map.Jason Rees (talk) 15:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All the track maps are produced using 6-hourly points for consistency. Any intermediate positions are not reflected in our maps due to limitations in differentiating them from the synoptic ones. This is why the Cat 4 peak does not show up in our maps. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

^ This is exactly the reason. It is assumed that all point are in six hour intervals.Supportstorm (talk) 19:27, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• NDRRMC Final Report (supposedly dated October 14, but no idea why that isn't mentioned anywhere)
• At least 4 fatalities: [1], [2]: one bitten by snake, one drowned (no elaboration), one drowned after going fishing on October 1 and found October 3 (confirmed by NDRRMC), one more drowned and body found October 8 (see later)
• [3] As of October 6, 3 dead according to "partial and unofficial report" from PH Coast Guard - presumably includes the one confirmed by NDRRMC, which would mean total is 6
• [4] One body found October 8, search and rescue to end October 9 (nothing that confirms that) so 12 missing (corroborates with NDRRMC final report)
• More info about the missing fishermen: [5], [6], [7]

Overall

• Govt reports, sorted latest first
• Level III response (October 3)

Guangdong

• 3.16 million affected (October 5)
• 6 dead, 223 injured (October 5)
• 12.53 billion renminbi, Level IV response (October 5)
• 18 dead, 4 missing (October 7)

Guangxi

• 1.44 million affected, 1 dead (October 5)
• 1.15 million without power (October 6)
• 1.96 million affected, 2 dead (October 7)
• 900 million renminbi
• 2.67 million affected (October 8)
• All power restored (October 8)

Hong Kong/Macau

• HKO

~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 09:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Reviewer: CodingCyclone (talk · contribs) 18:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This has been sitting for a while, so I figured that I'd try my hand at GA reviewing. This is my first review at the GA level, so please notify me of any mistakes I make. Thanks. Comments will come throughout the week; I'm reading through the article. There are several wording issues that must be resolved. I'm also doing some of this on a mobile device, so there may be some minor typos. Sorry about that. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:58, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Typhoon Mujigae, known in the Philippines as Tropical Storm Kabayan, was the strongest typhoon to strike the province of Guangdong in the month of October and the costliest typhoon to impact China in 2015. This sentence seems a bit long. maybe remove the part about Guangdong, since that record seems really specific. Optionally, unlink China; see MOS:OL.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The typhoon caused widespread damage in the Chinese provinces of Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hainan from October 3 to 6, 2015; earlier in its existence it impacted the Philippines as a developing tropical cyclone, and later on it brought heavy rain to Thailandand Vietnam. This just seems a bit disorganized; I would change it to As a developing tropical cyclone, Mujigae impacted the Philippines, before going on to make landfall in China, causing severe damage in the provinces of Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hainan when it made landfall between October 3 and October 6. Vietnam and Thailand also experienced heavy rainfall from the storm as it weakened over China.
  •  Not done. When I was writing this, I wanted to describe Mujigae's impacts in order of decreasing significance, so as to cover the most important parts of Mujigae's existence in the lead's first few sentences before going into its meteorological chronology. I'm not sure the proposed wording is much of an improvement, since it's also less concise. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Self-trout on that one. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• before emerging into the South China Sea the next morning. "before emerging into" seems a bit vague; I'm not sure how to describe it. I would use before crossing into instead.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Mujigae strengthened quickly and then rapidly over the next two days, becoming a mature typhoon with 10-minute sustained winds of 155 km/h (100 mph) Okay. A few things: "quickly and then rapidly" a bit redundant. Just say Mujigae underwent a period of rapid intensification over the next two days. "mature" is also an odd adjective to describe a typhoon, you can use something like strong or powerful: becoming a strong/powerful typhoon with 10-minute sustained winds of 155 km/h (100 mph) would sound better.
  •  Not done. Rapid intensification is supposed to be a technical term referring to a rate of intensification reaching a specific value, so it isn't really accurate to say Mujigae rapidly intensified for two full days. For the second part, "mature" isn't an unusual adjective to describe a tropical cyclone. It just refers to one that's well-developed with a clear eye, eyewall, rainbands, etc. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Self-trout codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• weakened swiftly I may just be nitpicking, but "quickly" would fit better here.
  •  Not done. Would rather not use "quickly" again when it's been used just a couple sentences above... ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • My mistake. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Mujigae's most severe impacts occurred in China, where the provinces of Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hainan were the worst hit. I would say ...most severe impacts occured in China, with the provinces of Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hainan being the worst hit.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• resulting in widespread power outages and disruptions to telecommunications and water supplies. Stick to past tense; use "which resulted" instead.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• besides killing seven and leaving 223 injured This wording is also odd. maybe use 'also' instead of 'besides', since besides makes them look like two separate events.
  •  Done, reworded somewhat. I'd rather minimise the use of "also" (see User:Tony1/How to improve your writing). ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Link flash floods and landslides in the third paragraph.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• These had the effect of disrupting tourism amid China's "Golden Week" holidays in lieu of their National Day. This seems like passive voice, though I may be wrong; rewrite as The storm disrupted travel during China's "Golden Week" holiday in celebration of their National Day., make sure to link Golden Week.
  •  Not done. I would think this is a suitable use of passive voice to emphasise that tourism was affected, while linking to the transport shutdowns as contributing factors. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• In other parts of China, Hong Kong and Macau experienced gusty winds and heavy rain from October 3 to 5 as Mujigae passed to the south, but were left relatively unscathed. Needs a rewrite: Hong Kong and Macau also experienced gusty winds and heavy rain as Mujigae made landfall from the south. Despite this, the regions experienced minimal damage.
  •  Partly done. The existing wording is more concise... I just removed "In other parts of China" instead since that's already implied by listing HK and Macao. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Towards the end of Mujigae's lifespan, the outer circulation of Mujigae brought heavy rains to parts of Vietnam and Thailand. Localized flash floods resulted, damaging homes and crops. Change "the outer circulation of Mujigae" to "its outer circulation", and change "...Thailand. Localized flash floods resulted" to "...Thailand, which resulted in localized flash floods".
  •  Done... somewhat? ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:58, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• A tropical disturbance developed near 11.9°N 130.3°E, about 600 km (370 mi) east of the Philippines, at 00:00 UTC on September 30. This sentence reads weirdly to me. Try rewording it like this: At about 00:00 UTC on September 30, a tropical disturbance developed near 11.9°N 130.3°E, about 600 km (370 mi) east of the Philippines.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) deemed the disturbance to have become a tropical depression at 12:00 UTC and gave it the identifier 22W. Again, I would lead with the time: By 12:00 UTC, the Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) deemed the disturbance to have become a tropical depression and gave it the identifier 22W.
  •  Not done. Leading with the time too often introduces a lot of commas, which disrupts flow. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The depression was lopsided at this time, with the bulk of thunderstorm activity on the system's western flank. I don't think "western flank" is the most clear way to describe it. What about ...with the bulk of thunderstorm activity located to the west of the system's center?
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• west-northwestwards under the influence I would add a comma between "west-northwestwards" and "under..."
  •  Not done. Adding a comma there removes the implication that the system's movement was due to the subtropical ridge. If you prefer, I can add a comma after "October 1" instead. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's better, thanks. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration named the system Kabayan in the morning. The morning in what? Local time? UTC? Please clarify this.
  •  Not done. I would think it's clear that it's UTC, since that's what the entire section uses. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, but could you please add a specific date? I'm not sure if it's October 1, 2, or something else... codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Done and added the time (I should have probably done that originally to avoid any confusion). ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 04:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The JMA upgraded the system to a tropical storm at 12:00 UTC as it began producing 10-minute sustained winds of 65 km/h (40 mph), simultaneously naming it Mujigae. The wording currently makes it sound like they happened to occur at the same time, not that it was named because it reached tropical storm force. Replace "simultaneously naming it Mujigae" with "giving it the name Mujigae".
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The JTWC, however, maintained the system as a tropical depression as it approached the Philippines. Wording also affects clarity here. It sounds like the JTWC is a higher power which determines whether Mujigae strengthens or not. I would say At this time, the JTWC still classified Mujigae as a tropical depression.
  •  Done, reworded slightly differently to your recommendation. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's better than how I would have worded it! codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Once over water, Mujigae soon resumed intensifying, taking advantage of 28–29 °C (82–84 °F) sea surface temperatures and strong outflow despite slightly elevated wind shear. This makes it sound human...change to Once over water, Mujigae soon resumed intensifying under favourable conditions despite elevated wind shear, with 28–29 °C (82–84 °F) sea surface temperatures and strong outflow influencing the storm's development.
  •  Not done for now. This is an aspect of my writing style – I feel some slight anthropomorphism helps to make an otherwise highly technical section more engaging/readable, as long as it doesn't imply that the tropical cyclone was sentient. I suppose it's somewhat inevitable too since the system is the main subject of the section anyway, so I end up talking a lot about what the system did and how it evolved. If it's too weird I can go and reword it, though. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see what you mean. It's fine like this. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• The JTWC finally assessed Mujigae to have become a tropical storm replace "to have become" with "to be".
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• wrapped more tightly into the system's circulation. I may be wrong, but I think that using "around" would be better.
  •  Not done. That's the wording the JTWC uses. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Self-trout for that one too, I'm not too familiar with JTWC wording.
• giving Mujigae ample energy to draw upon for strengthening I would make this more concise: making conditions favourable for Mujigae to strengthen further.
  •  Not done. The favourable conditions in question are the anomalously high SSTs, so the recommended change doesn't make as much sense. I included this as a simplified explanation of how high SSTs can result in intensification. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:38, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Rapid weakening commenced change "commenced" to "began".
  •  Not done, I prefer "commenced" for variety. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• last noted it change to issued its last advisory on it
  •  Not done. Advisories generally refer to those issued operationally. The last advisory may not have been issued at that time. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Last noted is still a bit vague. Ar what stage would it last be noted? When it becomes non-tropical, or when it fully dissipates? I would clarify that here. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Their last position has Mujigae still as a 35-kt tropical storm... hopefully this new wording is clearer. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 04:52, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• bringing moderate rain Do you have a specific amount?
  • There's a rainfall total in the next paragraph? That first sentence is meant to be an overview. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Eee, sorry codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• 50 barangays Link barangays.
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:43, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• though that number decreased to 56 by October 5 Do we know what happened to the fishermen? Were they confirmed dead? Rescued?
  •  Resolved. Source says they were rescued. I moved that bit further down to add the implication that they were found by the search and rescue operations. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:43, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's it for this section, there aren't too many problems here.

• Mujigae was the costliest typhoon to impact China in 2015. ^{[citation needed]}
  • Page 3 of the 48th Typhoon Committee Executive Summary of Members' Reports (ref 34): "However, it was Mujigae in October that brought the most direct economic loss." ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• For context, tornadoes in China are rather uncommon: less than 100 were recorded over the past 50 years, of which about 20 were at or above EF3 intensity. ^{[citation needed]}, and you can remove "For context," since it seems unnecessary.
  • It's supported by Zhao et al., 2017. To me, "For context" seems necessary to explain the sudden switch to present tense and to note that the following bit is an explanatory supplement rather than more descriptions of damage. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• four missing As of when?
  •  Resolved. They were listed as missing by October 5, but unfortunately I can't conclusively determine what happened to them. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• living in vulnerable areas were resettled Did they resettle permanently, or did they just evacuate?
  •  Resolved, meant that they were evacuated. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• storm surge failed to breach the city Seems a bit dramatic, what about "storm surge did not affect the city"?
  •  Partly done I think I meant to imply here that storm surge did not enter the city, which is what I'll change the wording to. I don't think it's really accurate to say it didn't "affect" the city since it definitely caused some worry to the inhabitants. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• morning on Change to "morning of".
  •  Done ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:52, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• causing a stoppage This could be more concise - change to just "stopped".
• crocodile farm was flooded and some of its inhabitants escaped Need a comma after "flooded".
• That's all for this section! codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 19:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done with both. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 01:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• All good! 😊 codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 19:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig's down, please wait for this one ... codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 19:41, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It finally worked! 🎉 Destroyeraa-alt said that he didn't see any issues, so I'll pass this. I got a similarity of 10.7% here but there was no copyvio. Congratulations! codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 18:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Sources look good. codingcyclone ^advisories/_damages 00:24, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: