This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
38th edition of The Hurricane Herald
Volume XIV, Issue 38, August 1, 2019 ![]() The Hurricane Herald is the arbitrarily periodical newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The newsletter aims to provide in summary the recent activities and developments of the WikiProject, in addition to global tropical cyclone activity. The Hurricane Herald has been running since its first edition ran on June 4, 2006; it has been almost thirteen years since that time. If you wish to receive or discontinue subscription to this newsletter, please visit the mailing list. This issue of The Hurricane Herald covers all project related events from June 1–July 31, 2019. This edition's editor and author is ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) . Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve the newsletter and other cyclone-related articles. Past editions can be viewed here. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Storm of the month and other tropical activity ![]() Hurricane Barry was the wettest tropical storm on record in Arkansas, and one of only four hurricanes to strike Louisiana in July. Originating from a trough over the southeastern United States, Barry formed on July 11 off the southeast Louisiana coast. Despite wind shear and an asymmetrical structure, the storm intensified into a minimal hurricane before making landfall near Intracoastal City, Louisiana. Barry dropped heavy rainfall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Ohio Valley, peaking at 23.43 in (595 mm) near Ragley, Louisiana. The storm caused flooding rains, power outages, and one death due to rip currents. Damage totaled over US$500 million.
Member of the month (edition) – TheAustinMan ![]() TheAustinMan has been involved with WPTC since 2009. Since the last newsletter, TheAustinMan worked on the Storm of the Month (Barry), as well as 1915 Galveston hurricane, Typhoon Alice (1979), 1937 Atlantic hurricane season, 1944 Jamaica hurricane, and the 1944 Cuba–Florida hurricane. A prolific editor, TheAustinMan has contributed to three featured articles and 46 good articles. Thank you for your contributions! New WikiProject Members since the last newsletter in June/July 2019 More information can be found here. This list lists members who have joined/rejoined the WikiProject since the release of the last issue in May 2019. Sorted chronologically. Struckout users denote users who have left or have been banned.
To our new members: welcome to the project, and happy editing! Feel free to check the to-do list at the bottom right of the newsletter for things that you might want to work on. To our veteran members: thank you for your edits and your tireless contributions! Current assessment table Assessments valid as of this printing. Depending on when you may be viewing this newsletter, the table may be outdated. See here for the latest, most up to date statistics.
Sourcing guidelines, by TheAustinMan The core content policies on Wikipedia (neutral point of view, no original research, and verifiability) all apply to articles tagged by WikiProject Tropical cyclones. The project's style guidelines also provide information on how to cite sources effectively. Relevant guidelines discussing the WikiProject's tropical meteorology articles may also be found at WP:SCICITE and WP:SCIRS. Reports, bulletins, and other products issued by Regional Specialized Meteorological Centers are the authoritative source on meteorological information pertaining to tropical cyclones in their respective basins. This includes both quantitative and qualitative information about a storm's characteristics, including intensities, durations, and locations. The most recent post-storm assessments take precedence over operational data. Thus, post-season revisions to a storm's "best track" file, new information presented in a tropical cyclone report, or official database adjustments made by the Atlantic hurricane reanalysis project, or other official reanalyses supersede operational information where they disagree. Data in operational RSMC products can still be used if later data does not dispute them. Information from other public agencies can also be used, but generally require in-text attribution. While the original best track data from meteorological agencies is a reliable source and can be referenced, readers often find difficulty interpreting them. Consider using IBTrACS, a more easily understandable track database, which is endorsed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), for this information. Because the Automated Tropical Cyclone Forecasting System (ATCF) used by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center and National Hurricane Center is liable to change frequently in realtime, they should not be used for currently active storms. Forecasts from these agencies and RSMCs should only be used to cite the forecasts themselves; in other words, they can only be used to describe what was expected to occur, and never to describe what did occur. Maps and other graphics published by meteorological agencies may be used to describe events (see the associated essay). However, they should only be referenced if they are explicit in conveying the supported information and do not require any rigorous meteorological interpretation (such as satellite analysis or drawing conclusions over what the arrangement of meteorological features represents). In general, self-published sources should not be used as sources for present or historical storm intensities. However, information contained in articles from reliable sources or commentary from established tropical cyclone experts can be used as sources for information not covered by WMO-endorsed agencies. If such sources dispute WMO-endorsed meteorological data, commentary on the disputed information may be used, making sure to attribute claims and giving due weight. Storm effects are typically referenced with a wide array of published sources. These may include news organizations, risk assessment organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGO), government agencies, and impact databases. So long as they are reliable sources, they can be used as references for tropical cyclone impacts. Note that figures from early impact reports, often disseminated by the first NGO situation reports and news reports, may quickly be outdated in light of newer information. When sourcing damage totals or casualty figures, use the most recent value from a reliable source, as these values tend to be more stable and use more up-to-date information. If such figures are disputed by other reliable sources, this should be noted in the article, making sure to attribute claims and giving due weight. Routine calculations of damage and casualty figures (for instance, adding casualties from different countries) are acceptable as long as they arise from reliable sources. Latest WikiProject Alerts The following are the latest article developments as updated by AAlertBot, as of the publishing of this issue. Due to the bot workings, some of these updates may seem out of place; nonetheless, they are included here. Did you know
Templates for discussion
Featured article candidates
Featured list candidates
Good article nominees
Good article reassessments
Requested moves
Articles to be merged
Articles for creation
Updated daily by AAlertBot — Discuss? / Report bug? / Request feature?
Click to watch (Subscribe via ![]() ![]() From the Main Page From the Main Page documents WikiProject related materials that have appeared on the main page from April 14–May 31, 2019 in chronological order.
History of WikiProject Tropical cyclones The article for hurricane (tropical cyclone) was created on December 2, 2001. On October 3, 2002, User:Ed Poor created an article for Hurricane Lili while the storm was active and near peak intensity; since then, 163 other people have edited the article to help make it a On May 19, 2005, User:Tom created Template:Infobox Hurricane, which standardized the infobox that appears in every storm article. On July 20, User:Skywayman created the article for the 2005 Pacific typhoon season, which became the third basin to get season articles. On July 31, User:Holderca1 created the article for 2004-05 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone season – for the first several years on Wikipedia, the SHEM was handled in a singular article, but was split into SWIO, AUS, and SPAC beginning on April 16, 2007, and finished on April 21, 2013. During the hyperactive 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, articles were created quickly for the most powerful storms, including Hurricane Dennis which quickly became an FA. On August 26, 2005, User:CrazyC83 created an article for Hurricane Katrina after the legendary storm crossed over southern Florida. By two days later, there were 500 edits to the article, and the hurricane was threatening to hit New Orleans as a Category 4 or 5. We now know it was “only” a Category 3 at landfall. In the 14 years since Katrina, there have been 6,327 editors to the Hurricane Katrina article, along with 23 sub-articles. During the 2005 season, there were debates among editors whether lesser notable storms, like Hurricane Cindy (2005), should have articles. At one point in 2006, there were articles for every named storm during the 2005 AHS, but in the 13 years since then, articles for tropical storms Franklin, Harvey, and Lee, and Philippe were created and merged. As a way to coordinate edits among the tropical cyclone pages, User:Jdorje created Template:Hurricane on September 12, 2005. This is the same template that appears on the talk pages for every article in the WPTC. On October 5, Jdorje officially created WP:WPTC, the tropical cyclone WikiProject. That October, in quick succession, the Atlantic hurricane seasons reached back to the beginning of recordkeeping (before 1600s) due to a collaboration of several editors; User:RattleMan created the first season article for the North Indian Ocean; User:Miss Madeline successfully nominated List of California hurricanes for featured list; and Jdorje created a a standardized storm path template. In 2006, a series of users improved articles worldwide to featured article status. Professional met David Roth joined the project, and in the same year, the NOAA and NHC copied some material from Wikipedia, including track maps, and the Tropical Cyclone Report for Tropical Storm Chris (2006). In June 2006, User:Nilfanion created the project assessment page, which documents the status of every article, organized by basin, the year, and storm shaded by the quality. On August 1, the chat room on IRC for the project was created, which allowed real-time communication among editors. There’s something special about conversing with fellow weather geeks during an epic storm, which seems to have become all the more common. On January 1, 2007, the number of good articles in the project reached 100. On January 29th, a collaboration of users made the List of retired Pacific hurricane names the first featured topic in the project. It was joined by the 2003 Atlantic hurricane season in March 2007. In 2008, further collaborations helped make the article for tropical cyclone a featured article, one of 100 FA’s in the project. Notably among project members, Tropical Storm Erick (2007) became featured on December 14, 2008. The storm lasted for a short amount of time over open waters, and as such, it was the shortest featured article anywhere on Wikipedia. Users questioned whether the storm was notable enough to have such a detailed article, but the article described the storm in articulate detail. After an AFD and two featured article review (and a series of low-notability storms being merged), Erick was delisted as a featured article on March 2, 2013. In the period from 2008 to 2013, users created task forces for various basins, articles for all of the seasons in the Atlantic and EPAC, and enough high-quality articles that more than half of all storm/season articles were good or featured articles. In January 2008, there were 1000 articles in the entire project. On January 1, 2014, User:Yellow Evan created Typhoon Nancy (1982), which was the 2000th article in the project. In October 2008, there were 100 FA’s in the project, which reached 200 on November 28, 2015, with Hurricane Fay (2014). By March 2016, every basin had at least 100 storm articles, multiple featured articles, and season articles of various quality.
This section lists content that have become featured, articles and lists, since the past newsletter in mid-April 2019.
WikiProject Tropical Cyclones: News & Developments
New articles since the last newsletter include:
New GA's include: WikiProject To-Do Project Goals & Progress The following is the current progress on the three milestone goals set by the WikiProject as of this publishing. They can be found, updated, at the main WikiProject page.
|
Can you explain...
your reversion on Typhoon Lekima (2019)?S Philbrick(Talk) 16:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Sphilbrick: 20:21, August 11, 2019 Hurricane Noah talk contribs 11,467 bytes +2,474 Undid revision 910333244 by 219.78.191.165 (talk) Vandalism Tags: Undo, PHP7... most edits from this point onwards have been redacted. That means edits before the IP removed the info need to be redacted as well. NoahTalk 16:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hurricane Noah, I didn't follow that, but I think I've taken care of it. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Sphilbrick: It looks fine now. I would have asked for temp extended protection had I known about the serious copy vios, but it's too late for that now. NoahTalk 16:20, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hurricane Noah, I didn't follow that, but I think I've taken care of it. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Question
I want to ask why the deaths and the $400 million damage are unrelated to Sergio? --A1Cafel (talk) 09:38, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel: They were caused by an unusually powerful cold front that passed through Texas days after Sergio did. NoahTalk 10:44, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
barnstar
![]() |
The E=mc² Barnstar | |
Hurricane Sergio (2018) is just fantastic, as are the rest of your weather-related contributions. Chetsford (talk) 05:58, 16 August 2019 (UTC) |
@Chetsford: Thank you, I'm glad you like it. NoahTalk 14:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
August 2019
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Tropical Storm Dorian (2019), you may be blocked from editing. If you believe the article should be deleted, nominate it at WP:AFD. Edit warring to blank the page is extremely disruptive. ‑Scottywong| [converse] || 03:39, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Scottywong: It is problematic when new users create articles for storms that aren't deserving due to lack of notability. AfD is not the proper venue for these articles as a redirect is needed. I explicitly told that user to make a draft then wait and see if the impacts were severe enough before making an article (on his talkpage). We don't need a duplicate of content in 2019 Atlantic hurricane season#Tropical Storm Dorian. As for the explanation I gave, WP:TOOSOON is good enough for storms that may have impact in a few days, but haven't yet done much. We have criteria that need to be met in order for an article to be created. That simply hasn't been satisfied at this time due to lack of land impact. There really isn't much in that article and the content that is there is bloated (Also other massive issues). Keep in mind NOT ONE, BUT TWO of us reverted the article and more agreed that the storm was not deserving of an article (I would be willing to get them if you need the proof). NoahTalk 10:44, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not commenting on whether or not the article should be deleted, I haven't even read it and it doesn't matter. The point is that you can't just go around replacing someone's work with a redirect, especially when you've already tried to replace it with a redirect once and you were quickly reverted. Replacing the content of an article with a redirect is the same as deleting the article. Wikipedia has procedures for deleting articles: WP:CSD, WP:PROD, WP:AFD. If you try to blank the article and someone reverts you, the next appropriate step is to either start a discussion on a talk page (the user's talk page or the article's talk page), or nominate the article at AFD. Trying to repeatedly blank the article is disruptive, it amounts to edit warring, and you'll eventually get blocked for it. ‑Scottywong| [converse] || 13:55, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Scottywong: It is problematic when new users create articles for storms that aren't deserving due to lack of notability. AfD is not the proper venue for these articles as a redirect is needed. I explicitly told that user to make a draft then wait and see if the impacts were severe enough before making an article (on his talkpage). We don't need a duplicate of content in 2019 Atlantic hurricane season#Tropical Storm Dorian. As for the explanation I gave, WP:TOOSOON is good enough for storms that may have impact in a few days, but haven't yet done much. We have criteria that need to be met in order for an article to be created. That simply hasn't been satisfied at this time due to lack of land impact. There really isn't much in that article and the content that is there is bloated (Also other massive issues). Keep in mind NOT ONE, BUT TWO of us reverted the article and more agreed that the storm was not deserving of an article (I would be willing to get them if you need the proof). NoahTalk 10:44, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
It's also good to remind of Article Guidelines, Hurricanes, typhoons etc should only receive a separate article if they are long enough not to be considered a stub. If there isn't enough to write about, the text can go inside the article for the hurricane season. When creating a new article for an active storm when it may or may not be appropriate (i.e. a major hurricane currently threatening land), it is generally best to put a request up in the discussion for that hurricane season (e.g. Talk:2017 Atlantic hurricane season) and discuss it with others. However, we would also encourage you to be bold and make the article if you think it is notable or is very likely to become notable within 72 hours.
I say this as just looking up the notability of storms after it's been a while. – The Grid (talk) 16:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- And, 3 days after the article was created, the storm became a hurricane, and now it's national news. ‑Scottywong| [gossip] || 15:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Scottywong: Every storm near the US is national news regardless of intensity. It happened to turn early and miss Hispaniola and Puerto Rico, which allowed it to become very strong. We aren't fortune tellers. Just because it is newsworthy does not substantiate notability. As a project, we ended the days of every storm getting an article. The storm has to actually do something to deserve an article. At that time, the requirements were not satisfied. Wyatt prematurely created the article. No article should be posted with such minimal content available. I had him create a draft and the situation was resolved by the time A1 decided to report it. A1 got full protection on a page once when a dispute had been resolved at least 12 hours prior, which caused a headache since nobody could update it with storm information. NoahTalk 02:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar.
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thank You for the message on my talk page. I do still feel sad, but you kind of made me feel a little better. Though it is still devestating to think what those people are going through. I really would like to thank you, Noah. Wyatt2049 | (Talk) or (Stalk) 13:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC) |
Also, see the message I left on User Talk:Jasper Deng for a prayer. Pray for those people. --Wyatt2049 | (Talk) or (Stalk) 13:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks |
I was wondering where you were at ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 02:40, 2 September 2019 (UTC) |
~ Question ~
Hey! what is a MH Article:? ~mitch~ (talk) 04:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Mitchellhobbs: An article discussing the meteorological history. I will likely just make one myself and publish it after the storm dissipates so it has better flow and we dont have to worry about the infobox needing updated there too. NoahTalk 10:31, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Draft:Meteorological history of Hurricane Dorian Wow! Looks great Noah ~ very informative ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 20:05, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Mitchellhobbs: Glad you like it thus far, but it isn't complete just yet. NoahTalk 20:30, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Nomination
Hello, Noah! I know that you may be surprised by what I may say, But none of the following message is a typo. So. I think that you are great editor, and you have done many many contributions. You seem to have combated vandalism and have requested the protection of pages and have gone through. For these reasons, I would like to nominate you for Requests for adminship. I think that you will make a great admin. Let me know if you support the nomination, and I should create you an RFA page. --Wyatt2049 | (Talk) or (Stalk) 17:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- @Wyatt2049: While I have done a decent amount of work in content creation, I would be brutally ripped apart in a RfA for my overall lack of work elsewhere. I quite simply would not stand a chance at adminship. NoahTalk 19:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Still though, I think your a great editor, and you should keep going. You can do it! --Wyatt2049 | (Talk) or (Stalk) 19:33, 4 September 2019 (UTC)