Talk:Tropical Storm Sonca (2017)/GA1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GA review
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.
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 08:56, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Aviationwikiflight (talk · contribs) 09:17, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
Hi, I'll also be reviewing this in the coming week. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 09:17, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Aviationwikiflight: hello?
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")13:16, 14 March 2026 (UTC)- Sorry. I was more busy than usual. I'll get to it within the coming days. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:30, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Aviationwikiflight: hello?
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")12:53, 25 March 2026 (UTC)- Sorry again. I'm nearly done writing all the comments I have on the article. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 05:51, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Aviationwikiflight: hello?
- Sorry. I was more busy than usual. I'll get to it within the coming days. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 15:30, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Initial comments
- The nominator is "the author of more than 10% of the article [and is] ranked in the top five by authorship", having contributed to 44.6% of the article and ranking 1st per Xtools. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
- This article wouldn't qualify under WP:GAFAIL as it is not "a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria": it does not contain copyright violations (4.6% similarity detected, not actionable, per Earwig's Copyvio Detector), it does not have or need cleanup banners, it is stable, and as this is the article's first GA nomination, there are no noted issues that need to be fixed. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
- File:Sonca 2017-07-25 0630Z.jpg is relevant and correctly tagged. Its caption is without flaw. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
- File:Sonca 2017 track.png was created and released into the public domain by a Wikipedia user, so it is correctly tagged. It is relevant and its caption is correct. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
- File:20170724 TC SONCA.pdf: correctly, licensed, and captioned and is relevant. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Meteorological history
- "
On July 21, both the JMA and the JTWC reported that Tropical Depression 08W had developed approximately 582 km (361 mi) to the south of Hong Kong.
" – I'm confused as to how the distance figure was measured. The JMA source doesn't verify the distance and the JTWC source is dead. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- "
The storm had a favorable environment...
" – True, but a bit misleading as the environment was "marginally-favorable", not just "favorable". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed.
- "
The JTWC later assessed that there was a poor likelihood of it becoming a tropical cyclone, citing reasons such as poor initialization and small size.
" – Relevant JTWC excerpt: "
" Three things:Dynamic guidance is very limited due to the poor initialization of the available global models, therefore, there is low confidence in the JTWC forecast track. TD 08W is forecast to intensify steadily to a peak intensity of 55 knots, however, there is considerable uncertainty in the peak intensity due to the model's poor initialization and the small system size (historically favorable for rapid intensification).
- The JTWC did not say that "there was a poor likelihood of it becoming a tropical cyclone". They predicted that it would "intensify steadily to a peak intensity of 55 knots", but that the peak intensity was still uncertain. In addition, a TD is a tropical cyclone, so is a TS as per their prediction of the TD attaining 55 knots, the equivalent of a TS. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
- "Poor initialization" of what? It should be explained that, per the JTWC, due to the model's poor initialization by the JTWC (resulting in a "low confidence in the JTWC forecast track"), "there is considerable uncertainty in the peak intensity". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
- "Small size" of what? Explain that it was due to the small size of the TD. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
- "
The storm's environment remained favorable the following day, with vertical windshear offset by poleward outflow; despite this, the JTWC did not change their prediction.
" – Subtle MOS:EDITORIAL. The use of "despite" implies that the JTWC should have changed their prediction, which is not stated in the source. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Removed
- "
Early the next day, the JTWC upgraded their prediction to likely based on newly uncovered satellite footage; they also designated the system as a tropical storm.
" – A few things:
- "
...the JTWC upgraded their prediction to likely...
" – What does this mean? What prediction did they change to "likely" which all alone lacks context. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Cut; I don't know what I meant.
- "
...based on newly uncovered satellite footage...
" – My reading of the source would be that they reanalysed satellite imagery in addition to analysing another satellite image, so this change was not entirely based on new imagery. ("THE INITIAL POSITION IS PLACED WITH GOOD CONFIDENCE BASED ON RECENT SATELLITE FIXES AND A 220238Z METOP-B ASCAT IMAGE.") Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Cut along with the former
- "
- "
After drifting westward for a couple of days, the system intensified into a tropical storm by JMA while nearing the island province of Haina...
" – I can't verify any of this in the cited source. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Cut everything except the tropical storm thingy, it is shown there.
- "
After 13 hours, the storm was pulled southward by a building direction.
" – Clarify what a "building direction" is? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Specified
- "
The storm later accelerated north after a steering ridge reoriented the storm.
" – Suggestion: I propose linking Ridge (meteorology) for those who might not know what it is. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Linked for the former issue
Preparations and impact
Vietnam
- "
During the storm, heavy floods were recorded in Vietnam, causing catastrophic property damage, submerging 229 villages.
" – The source uses "extensive", not "catastrophic". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
- "
A telegram was sent to send firefighters and police to rescue people in the northern provinces of Vietnam.
" – Sending a directive ("the Ministry of Public Security issued a directive") is not the same as sending a telegram. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
- "
Vietnam Airlines cancelled 11 flights to and from the Phu Bai International Airport while VietJet Air cancelled 16.
" – Add this source which confirms that confirms that Vietnam Airlines cancelled 11 flights as the cited source only says that the airlines was expected to cancel 11 flights. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Added
- "
Five spillways in the largest lake in Nghệ An, were opened, which caused a major flood which submerged 20,000 homes.
" – The underlined part is about a flood release in 2013 ("The 2013 flood release was the first time all five spillway gates of the Vuc Mau reservoir were opened simultaneously since the reservoir began operation, causing a historic flood that submerged 20,000 houses in Hoang Mai town, with estimated damages of 800 billion VND.") per the cited source, so it needs to be removed. In addition, I don't see the relevance of this passage since no reports of damage came from it ("[...] fearing Typhoon Sonca could cause heavy rain in the area, the unit carried out the release of water sequentially from spillway gates No. 1 to No. 5. [...] Mr. Thang said, adding that the sequential opening of all five spillway gates was to test the reservoir's operation."). Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- I removed the underlined part, but I think the spillway part is still needed.
- "
At least six people were killed when the storm made landfall on July 25, all in the provinces of Hà Tĩnh and Quảng Trị.
" – Why mention the deaths in the context of "when the storm made landfall on July 25", when the source does not frame it that way (in addition to not mentioning when the deaths occurred)? ("According to the Central Steering Committee for Natural Disaster Prevention and Control, the storm has caused 6 deaths in Ha Tinh and Quang Tri.") Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed it to "As of"
- "
Across the whole of Vietnam, roughly 5,777 hectares (14,280 acres) of paddy fields and 750 hectares (1,900 acres) of croplands were damaged.
" – The source only mention the provinces of Nghe An, Ha Tinh, Quang Binh, Quang Tri and Thua Thien Hue, so I wouldn't say that this represents "the whole of Vietnam". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
In Nghe An Province, the total damage caused by the storm reached 127 billion dong (US$5.6 million).
" – This is cited to a source published while the storm was still active (preliminary reporting), and mentions that damage totals exceeded 127 billion dong, not that the final damage total was 127 billion dong. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
Cambodia
- "
The National Committee for Disaster Management for Cambodia warned fishermen about the rough weather from the storm.
" – It was not the National Committee for Disaster Management for Cambodia that issued a statement, but the Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology per the cited source. In addition, whilst it can be inferred that they were warning fishermen "about the rough weather from the storm", the Ministry only says, "Please, everyone, especially fishermen and passengers at sea, be careful to avoid accidents." I think this would be WP:OR. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
Authorities issued flood warnings and "safety hills" were set up with shelter, food, and supplies.
" – The cited source only mention a "flood warning", not warnings. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed to singular
- "
The Royal Cambodian Armed Forces deployed 350 soldiers to aid in evacuation efforts...
" – They were deployed in Preah Vihear to aid in relief efforts, not evacuation efforts per the cited source. ("In Preah Vihear province, 350 soldiers from the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces were deployed on Wednesday to aid relief efforts.") Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
...a provincial official of the Kampong Thom province stated that the government was prepared to evacuate residents.
" – At the time the statement was released, the spokesman stated that they were preparing to evacuate people, not that they were already prepared to do so. ("'The authorities in Kompong Thom province are preparing to evacuate people because the water has risen to nearly reach warning level,' said Keo Vy, spokesman for the National Committee for Disaster Management.") Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
Tropical Storm Sonca affected four provinces across Cambodia, at least three people died, and 2,686 houses were submerged. 53 households were also affected
" – Are there any reports of deaths related to the storm beyond 31 July 2017? If not, remove the "at least". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Omitted
- "
Heavy floods affected four provinces, with 550 affected families and at least 1000 displaced residents.
" – Two things:
- It's already mentioned that the storm affected four provinces in the comment above. Why not merge both sentences? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Merged
- In addition, why is "550 affected families" stated as fact but "1000 displaced residents" includes "at least"? The cited source does not use "at least". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
Thailand
- "
Flash floods across Thailand killed 23 people and affected 44 out of 76 provinces in Thailand.
" – Not in the cited source. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Omitted
- "
...the storm forced the closer of Sakon Nakhon Airport lasting for 3 days.
" – Not in the cited source. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Omitted
- "
The floods created by the storm were the strongest floods in Thailand for two decades.
" – The source says that, "Sakon Nakhon was hardest hit by the floods -- said to be the worst in two decades --triggered by the tropical storm Sonca." It doesn't say that the floods were the strongest in Thailand in two decades, this would apply to Sakon Nakhon. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
In Lopburi province, some people were rescued by boat after the roads became impassable.
" – The cited source doesn't mention that people had to be rescued, only that they had to be assisted. ("Trapped water along roadways in Lopburi province has made some roads impassable and authorities have had to employ flat bottom boats to assist locals trying to reach dry land.") Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
Small cars were unable to pass in roads in Kalasin due to flooding.
" – The cited source says that, "Several hours of raining caused flood in the Muang District of Kalasin, small cars are struggle [sic] to pass[ ]", not that they were unable to pass. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Changed
- "
A broken flood wall caused major flooding in Sukhothai province.
" – The cited source does not state that the flooding was "major". Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:25, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fixed
Assessment
| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
| 1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | See Talk:Tropical Storm Sonca (2017)/GA1 #Meteorological history for "the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience". Other issues are noted in other sections. | |
| 1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Some minor issues only. | |
| 2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
| 2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
| 2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
| 2c. it contains no original research. | Numerous issues related to text-to-source integrity and WP:OR are specified above. | |
| 2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
| 3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
| 3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
| 4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
| 5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
| 6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
| 6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
| 7. Overall assessment. | 1a. and 2c. need to be addressed whilst the rest of the criteria do not have any noted/major issues. | |
I'm putting this nomination on hold for you to have the time to address the issues. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 13:35, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Aviationwikiflight: Addressed all comments.
🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter")06:45, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
Assessment 2
| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
| 1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
| 1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
| 2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
| 2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
| 2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
| 2c. it contains no original research. | ||
| 2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
| 3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
| 3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
| 4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
| 5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
| 6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
| 6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
| 7. Overall assessment. | ||
@TheNuggeteer: Ok, I've gone through the article again and all noted issues/suggestions have been addressed. I'm happy to pass this. Great work! Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:48, 2 April 2026 (UTC)