Talk:Typhoon Man-yi

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Edit to Part of Article

[edit]

Edited "Office of Civil Defense" to refer to the Philippine CD, not the American one. Boypogikami132 (talk) 11:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done But please be WP:BOLD—you can fix it yourself. HurricaneEdgar 11:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 November 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved for now. (closed by non-admin page mover) JJPMaster (she/they) 04:35, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Man-yi (2024) → Typhoon Man-yi – This iteration is definitely going to become the most significant and destructive of all Man-Yis. Comrade TT TV (talk) 14:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait – The typhoon is still active and we don't yet have damage totals or death tolls yet from the Philippines. A Category 5 in this basin is nothing new, especially in the Philippine Sea...this has happened many times in the past four years alone and storm names like Saola still have the year attached. So let's wait first to see if Man-yi does damage warranting primary topic. VantaWiki (talk) 14:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait This is too early, as the storm is still active. I will support it if the storm becomes the primary topic, but for now, it's too early. HurricaneEdgar 15:01, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - If it gets very severe and becomes the primary topic, I'd say move it. But for now, its WAY too early. [[User:Accordthemusician]] (talk) 15:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait- The damage is uncertain now but from what i hear it is very destructive Crominance (talk) 10:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait a little bit due to the fact that it's only still going through the Philippines. Thehurricaneman (talk) 19:20, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Too soon. Damages haven't been tabulated yet, so I don't think it's wise to move the article now. Bugnawfang 10:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: such a move request would be jumping the gun. Until more information about its impacts comes out, moving the article would be too soon. ZZZ'S 05:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait it is still too early to tell, although the signs are there that this is going to be the most significant incarnation of Man-yi. Once it is established that this article meets WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, then I'll change my stance. Vida0007 (talk) 16:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WPAC has more significant storms for one name. Just a random Wikipedian(talk) 00:29, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - damages and fatalities unclear. Wildfireupdateman (talk) 16:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
still unclear damages at Catanduanes , typhoon first landfall/hit at philippines. source PH Govt. 209.35.172.139 (talk) 17:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, too early. few damages. Ampil (Ταικ • Cοnτribυτιοns) 04:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Threatening and making landfall as a super typhoon makes 2024’s Man-yi the primary topic in my opinion. AwesomeAndEpicGamer (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait or even oppose as the storm is still active and 8 deaths and $17,000 in damages do not suffice for retirement. HarukaAmaranth 02:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Preliminary estimates + Its likely going to have way more damages because it made landfall as a Cat 5 equivalent typhoon in Catanduanes (Insendieum on a phone) 2600:6C54:7F7F:61FE:64FA:54BE:ED14:B7F1 (talk) 03:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's been five days after landfall and barring any sudden jump in the death or damage totals I don't see the long-term significance outstripping that of 2013 and 2018. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 11:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Man-yi of 2018 actually stayed out to sea, but in terms of damages, Man-yi of 2013 is still more devastating. You're HALF right on this information. Accordthemusician (talk) 13:25, 22 November 2024 (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.

Requested move 16 November 2024

[edit]

How many super typhoons has it been? 16 storms have been named by PAGASA and 6 (unofficial) were named by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center and 5 of them were named by it. Go and feel bad for the people in Batanes. Anenglishguyinthephils95 (talk) 10:10, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Total damage

[edit]

According to NDRRMC (official report), damage of three typhoons was combined. We can calculate the total for the last typhoon - Typhoon Man-yi. If we separate it, it will be difficult to determine the damage for each storm. -- 2001:EE0:49B8:EBE0:D4B6:43C:3FFB:A2FD (talk) 13:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the NDRRMC is that it does not specify the source of the damage for each storm. Calculations are made without any evidence attributing the damage to a specific storm (Man-yi), which may lead to original research. HurricaneEdgar 13:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HurricaneEdgar But maybe the third independent source quoted from NDRRMC itself, in which the total damage can be combined into 2 or 3 TYs. Because the reports from NDRRMC from the beginning have combined the typhoons. This, I'm afraid, is difficult to separate the damage of 3 TYs because of the problem that they hit the Philippines consecutively within 1 week. So in my opinion, the best option should be to combine them into 1 storm for ease of doing, ease of assessment. 2001:EE0:49B8:EBE0:799B:B0D5:87DF:84F2 (talk) 05:30, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2001:EE0:49B8:EBE0:799B:B0D5:87DF:84F2 I like your idea of clarifying where the damage is from, as this may prevent readers from confusing it with other storms. As a result, I changed the three storm damages. HurricaneEdgar 06:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Krathon as strongest storm to Man-yi

[edit]

I am certainly no expert in cyclones, however should Man-yi be included in the strongest storms category in the 2024 typhoon season? 110.235.39.144 (talk) 03:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The pressure of Man-yi is not tied to Yagi and Krathon; therefore, it is not the strongest storm of the season. Wait until the JMA best track is released to confirm if there are significant changes. HurricaneEdgar 22:22, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 March 2025

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 22:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Man-yi (2024) → Typhoon Man-yi – Now that the storm was retired, and it was deadlier than any other storm of the same name, I propose moving the typhoon to the main name without the year. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure now that the name is retired, I think it is safe to move Accordthemusician (talk) 11:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as it was retired, it became the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC--A1Cafel (talk) 13:35, 3 March 2025 (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.

GA review

[edit]
Passed. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 00:13, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Typhoon Man-yi/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: HurricaneEdgar (talk · contribs) 07:36, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 06:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Hello! I'm TheNuggeteer. I want to review this article. I haven't reviewed GANs for a long time because I had a topic ban, but I will try to review this article properly. It's okay if you don't want me to review. I will put my comments here after about a few hours, so be updated! Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 06:08, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is all I (currently) have to offer. My next edit will be probably near 12:00 P.M., UTC.

Lead

[edit]
  • I feel like the parts about the preparation and impact need to be expanded because half of the article is based on these sections, yet a few sentences are only in the lead.checkY
  • Add some parts about the aftermath in the lead. checkY
  • I think the meteorological part is too long, but it's okay if you don't want to change it. checkY

Meteorological history

[edit]
  • Remove the comma on source 12.
  • Can you put the date of the Panganiban landfall?

Source check

[edit]

1. Kindly mention the specific page(s) that the sentences are based around.
11. Add source 12 to the "disorganized" claim. I can't see it here except in source 12.
15. Dead link. Use another one.
17. This source is for JMA, where is the source for JTWC "following suit"?
18. Is this source part of the sentence?
21. It only says the wind speeds, not the "violent typhoon".
25. No mention of the "west semicircle".
30. Not sure about this. Can you probably find a reliable (non-Twitter) source which mentions this?
 41. Where is the JTWC source?

Notes

[edit]
  • Kindly add a template to organize the dates (like , what you used in the sources).

Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 06:57, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding a review to the Preparations part. It seems to be that a major problem is the archiving, as multiple sources weren't shown to be archived. The author and date of creation weren't added in a large part of these sources.

Preparations

[edit]
  • "PAGASA added parts of Polillo Islands and Calaguas Islands to Signal No. 5" added sounds weird to me. Probably "declared"?
  • Add comma for Camarines Sur evacuations.
  • Twenty-eight should be spelled in numbers.
  • Explain what the alerts do in the third paragraph.

Source check

[edit]

42. Missing file like source 15; non-archived source.
43. Another missing file.
45. Add creation date and author.
46. Add date of creation. Storm surges are affecting the regions, but not as the same height as the last source.
47. Add author and creation date.
48. Another non-archived source.
49. Another non-archived source.
82. This article needs to be archived.
Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 09:30, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneEdgar: You seem active. Pinging. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Will address it tomorrow, PH time. Thank you. HurricaneEdgar 12:42, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneEdgar: Did you address those issues? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 00:37, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if this is late. I will start today since I was finishing Ahmed al-Sharaa's father's article earlier. HurricaneEdgar 01:28, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where are the other edits? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 09:30, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer I did some edits on ref formats and prose. Wanted to let you know that @HurricaneEdgar has sadly retired. RFNirmala (talk) 10:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I am on a trip, so I will prepare the rest of the review tomorrow. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 15:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

[edit]
  • Source 87 is extremely large; I suggest using the {{sfn}} template.
  • "The typhoon destroyed 16,433 homes and damaging" to "The typhoon destroyed 16,433 homes and damaged".
  • "At least 4,240,764" an estimated.
  • Add a title translation for source 89 and 90.
  • Add conversions for the first sentence of the second paragraph.
  • "13 ft (4 m)" change to "14 ft".
  • Link the Cagayan River.
  • What is dredging?
  • Add author and date for source 95.
  • "In the provincial capital Virac, the roof of the emergency operations center was damaged," is this important enough to include in the article?
  • This is an important note: The website names are extremely uneven; this needs to be fixed.
  • "A few houses were damaged in coastal areas of Albay." this is not in the source.

Review for the first two paragraphs of impact. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 11:48, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @TheNuggeteer! Did most points. But, I don't see how source 87 is extremely large. Some sources, those that aren't even PDF reports, reach around 5 or 6 lines. The mention of the emergency operations center in a provincial capital being damaged may be mentioned. Also verified the "coastal areas of Albay" sentence in the ABS-CBN source. I see where you get the uneven website names, so I might want to know what preferences you want for the website names. RFNirmala (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I must have missed the sentence in the source. Anyway, the preferences should be the names of the links which should be presented in the source. Like:
These are my preferences for the references. Will continue the review a bit later. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 06:44, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Impact (2)

[edit]
  • What is the use of the "Philippines" header if there are no other countries mentioned?
  • Make the archive link in source 104 the main one.
  • Add a "URL access level" parameter in source 105.
  • "Albay, parts" to "Albay and parts".
  • "Four people also went missing after their shanty" source say a couple and their child, is this four?

Aftermath

[edit]
  • "The government of Albay has pledged ₱1 million (US$20,304.57) in financial assistance and will" why is this current?
  • "will provide mental health and psychosocial support to Catanduanes" to "would provide mental health and psychosocial support to the citizens of Catanduanes".
  • "following the destructive landfall" is this neutral?
  • Add the governor of Catanduanes; he is important after all.
  • Add a translation of the title in source 132.
  • "and donate funds allocated for such events" to "and to donate funds for the events".
  • "while the United States will allocate" why current?
  • I think you should add more to the "relation to climate change section"; the four-storms event was internationally significant, right?
  • Add the date to source 144.

Retirement

[edit]
  • "that carved a path of destruction in the country" is this neutral?
  • "and it will never be used again as a typhoon name within the Philippine Area of Responsibility" I think this is repetitive.

Will continue the review a bit later or tomorrow. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 07:00, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RFNirmala: Finally finished the review. Thank you for your help in fixing the issues. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 05:39, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer I worked on a handful of points, though mostly on prse annd ref formatting (my edit summaries can tell). Is it OK if you can cross out what I've done or help me in minor edits for the GA review? The content additions/edits would take some time since it's my first time to delve into reading on typhoons. RFNirmala (talk) 12:54, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, will cross out the things you have already done. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 07:23, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Crossed it out. Remember, for the ref edits, here are the revisions:
Thanks for doing the fixes in the review! There are some things you have missed. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 07:50, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RFNirmala: Ping. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 23:56, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheNuggeteer: I worked on the points, you can check the history. I just have to find a JWTS source for 41 and content for the consecutive typhoon paragraph. What I found so far was that NASA called the series of typhoons "unusual" and mentioned a JMA report that last time it happened was the 1950s. For the Impact, I couldn't find in my search engine, though I somehow found two articles claiming the effect in Guam was almost none: [1] [2]. RFNirmala (talk) 13:16, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The JTWC source is here: [3]. Thank you for doing my comments! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:27, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the things you still missed:
  • The JTWC source 41
  • In Preparations, Twenty-eight should be spelled in numbers
  • 47. Add author and creation date.
  • 48. Another non-archived source.
  • 49. Another non-archived source.
  • 105. Needs "URL access level" parameter.
  • Shanty problem
  • Government providing mental health support (should be past tense)
  • Source 132 title translation.
  • Relation to climate change: Add more
Here are all of the points you missed. I am too lazy to cross out the points so just consider them done (except the ones I listed). Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:35, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you are done with the JTWC source 41 issue, I can do the rest (the Relation to climate change section can be expanded if you want to). 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:37, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Worked on the remaining ones! RFNirmala (talk) 14:51, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Passing. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 00:11, 7 September 2025 (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.

Did you know nomination

[edit]

(
)
From left to right: Typhoons Yinxing, Toraji, Usagi, and Man-yi
From left to right: Typhoons Yinxing, Toraji, Usagi, and Man-yi

"It is the first time that four named storms have existed at the same time in November since records began in 1951, Japan’s Meteorological Agency confirmed to CNN Tuesday. It’s also the first time in seven years that it has happened in any month."

"It is the first time that four named storms have existed at the same time in November since records began in 1951, Japan’s Meteorological Agency confirmed to CNN Tuesday. It’s also the first time in seven years that it has happened in any month."

    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: May be presented in main page in November (presence of typhoon)
Improved to Good Article status by RFNirmala (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

RFNirmala (talk) 01:51, 7 September 2025 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article achieved good article status on the day it was nominated. It is therefore eligible. No copyright violations or other policy issues detected. There are issues with both hooks. The first hook is not accurate the way it is written. When reading the hook, it makes it seem like there was an event in November 1951 where four tropical cyclones occurred simultaneously, and that in November 2024 that occurred a second time. That is not the case. The source is saying that record keeping began in 1951 and in the time since then the only time in which four tropical storms were recorded simultaneously in any November was in November 2024, not that it was a repeat of a weather phenomenon from November 1951. Also, this fact (found in the lead but accurately reported to the source and fine as written) has no inline citation. To fix this, the hook language will need to be modified and an inline citation added to the article.
As for the alt hook, it is accurate to the source, but the hook fact is not anywhere in the article. To use it, the fact will need to be added to the article with an inline citation. Once these issues are solved, please ping me.4meter4 (talk) 21:45, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@4meter4: I just reflected both hooks in the article body through a new paragraph. I'll change the main hook this way:
The main hook fact in is an image caption and in a Meteorological History paragraph. Tell me if it needs more clarification. RFNirmala (talk) 00:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Issues are fixed. Approving Alt0a and Alt1.4meter4 (talk) 00:50, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this. Would this mean both hooks would appear on the same day? I'd prefer both, but if only one is allowed, we ca go for alt0. RFNirmala (talk) 00:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The promoter will select one hook to feature, but your preference for Alt0a will be taken into consideration by that person. We only run one hook per approved nominee.4meter4 (talk) 01:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]