Am I correct ?

I've found something about present perfect, is that past action still remains in present.

For example:

The city has been devastated ("explenation from forum" the city was devastated by the storm, and it's still devastating)

This is another explenation

As I said before, I agree that it’s not helpful to only think of perfect tenses as describing actions in terms of their result or relevance. This is sometimes applicable. For example “he’s crashed the car” is an action that will inevitably have consequences; but that’s inferred from the context rather than the tense – you could say it in the simple past tense and the likelihood of consequences would remain. But it’s not always applicable. For example, “He’s started his new job” is no more than a statement of fact. The two things that link those two present perfect statements are (1) that they both relate to a completed action (that’s what perfect means in this context), and (2) in both cases what’s said is a status report, a description of the current situation.

Or

But the result is not usually still true in the present. Cumbria, where I live was, devastated by Storm Desmond in 2015, and the effects are still to be seen, but it is no longer devastated, so the present perfect is quite inappropriate.

What do you think ? I'm thinking that "result" in present perfect is kind a confusing.