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

Weather: Tropical / North Indian 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 articles 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 North Indian Ocean work group (assessed as Mid-importance). Asia B‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles B This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tropical cyclone outlooks: IMD // JTWC

IMD

TCAC advisories: 1 // 2

GMDSS bulletins: 1 // 2

Quadrant wind bulletin: 1

JTWC

Warnings: 1 // 2 // 3

Reasonings: 1 // 2 // 3

TCFAs: 1 // 2

Seven-day archives: IMD (DEMS) // IMD (VIDP) // JTWC

Do you guys that Tauktae will form on first week of April. GFS, ECMWF and now IMD predicts that a low pressure will form, although the RSMC stated that there's a low chance of formation within next 72 to 120 hrs. What do you guys think?. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 11:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BOB 01-2021 has formed and is currently forecast to strengthen further into a deep depression. Grifforzer (talk) 03:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beraniladri19 and Grifforzer: This is an interesting question, but Wikipedia is not for speculation, and is not a forum for general discussion on topics. If you would like to chat about this further, you can do it through other methods such as off-wiki forums. Thank you. CodingCyclone! 🌀 📘 22:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BOB 01 has now dissipated. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:27, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I want right now. Cyclocane (talk) 03:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not so fast, what you wanna add here ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneEdgar, Chicdat, Hey, you guys can't revert that. Last time when an IP added this then you guys didn't revert as WP:CRYSTAL or WP:OR violation. Then why are you reverting this ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:59, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just because an edit wasn't reverted for violating a policy doesn't mean any other edits similar to that should also not be reverted. I agree that that IP edit should have been removed, and I think the same with this one. It's still a violation of CRYSTAL and OR, regardless of whether or not a similar edit was not reverted or if it was in invisible markup anyway. Akbermamps 13:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Akbermamps: Ok I agree with you. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 13:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beraniladri19, this is Violation WP:CRSTAL WP:OR this is need to revert HurricaneEdgar 13:20, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneEdgar, It would be the same for Cyclone Tauktae. Predicting is also a violation of WP:CRYSTAL and also for some extent it is a WP:OR Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 13:23, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Still WP:CRYSTALBALL. Just because an unregistered user did it doesn't make it justifiable. You should know better than a new user, SMH. They also doesn't deserve to be bitten, since theres a high chance it wasn't vandalism. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 13:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricaneboy23, i agree with Hurricaneboy23 HurricaneEdgar 13:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricaneboy23, It wasn't a vandalism but it was a WP:CRYSTAL and WP:OR. It's our mistake that we didn't revert it Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 13:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cyclone Tauktae has now been a well marked low pressure area and the satellite imagery which shows all the cyclone tracks at one place hasn't been updated. Please look into the matter.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous in the world (talk • contribs) 05:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

this is now

Resolved

HurricaneEdgar 08:41, 21 May 2021 (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.

---

Pls don't remove it, but still the effects are so much, that some bit must be removed. But it will also don't make any sense so I'll try User:Akbermamps to do something. In a meantime don't revert my edit Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beraniladri19, the article is too long this is need clean up WP:AS that why we create the article cyclone tauktae HurricaneEdgar 12:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SIZERULE HurricaneEdgar 12:21, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneEdgar, I have contacted User:Akbermamps to do something. We aren't expert in remove lines without making it nonsense. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the impacts paragraph should at least be trimmed down to remove material that isn't necessarily descriptive or important to the impacts. An example of unimportant sentences that should be trimmed is the one about Wankhede Stadium, it's more suited to be part of the main article since it's just a specific effect for a small area. Another example is with the sentences about winds and power outages, they could be condensed into just "X area recieved N winds, Y area recieved O winds..." or "Power outages occurred in B area, C area, D area...". Important material that should definitely be kept are records, deaths, and damages since they're basically the things most people look for in the season article, more detailed or obscure information should go into the longer and bigger coverage cyclone article. Akbermamps 12:41, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akbermamps, Yeah, pls do it ASAP Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:43, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beraniladri19, argee per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tropical_cyclones/Style#Old_style HurricaneEdgar 12:46, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akbermamps I think we should split it, for eg :- I have explained the Pakistan impacts and also other impacts in Maldives and Sri Lanka in detail, it should be go to the "Elsewhere" section. And records should be kept, but you can remove the "Wankhede section part" and it's up to you whether you will remove the "Barge P305" or it will remain. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beraniladri19, it you i thick this is great idea pls read WP:SPLIT HurricaneEdgar 12:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneEdgar, Sorry to revert your edit but there's some things need to stay. For eg :- impact of South India, Maharashtra, Gujarat (specially the Saurashtra region) should stay. Also the elsewhere impact should also stay. I'll try to trim it as short as possible Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 13:48, 20 May 2021 (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.

Hey guys, I have created a draft, since it is a major threat to Odisha and West Bengal. If you want to edit you can do so... Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 10:22, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, pls don't add this system until it's officially recognized by RSMC New Delhi (aka IMD). We don't add unofficial systems unlike in the WPAC. Thank you. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 10:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Beraniladri19: Perhaps put it in an other systems section while we wait for the IMD to designate it? We can't really ignore what the JTWC is saying. Akbermamps 10:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akbermamps, I don't think so, we have never done like that. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 10:53, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We always add in unofficial systems regardless of what the IMD says about the system, since we have to maintain a neutral point of view and cover all tropical cyclones. In particular I note that Vamei is included in the 2001 NIO despite never being monitored by the IMD.Jason Rees (talk) 11:08, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i thick we need add, in the seasons in case IMD did upgraded HurricaneEdgar 11:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason Rees and Akbermamps: I have added it. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 11:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we do not need to add it to an other systems section, which is commonly used for systems that have dissipated and do not have much information around about them. This is a currently active system, that thanks to the JTWC's change in procedures now has prognostics reasoning and a lot more information available about it. As a result, I would stop panicking about leaving it in the normal section and poke the IMD in to monitoring it.Jason Rees (talk) 11:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Rees, Plus, according to their national bulletin they have upgraded to a WML and predicted to become a depression, so that makes sense. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 11:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Is Gulab worthy of an article? Please comment about your opinions. Hurricane4235 (talk) 11:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane4235, There's a draft for Cyclone Gulab. To edit click here Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seen too confusing on this, to prevent a edit war if the Gulab same ARB 02? HurricaneEdgar 06:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Meow: -- HurricaneEdgar 06:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneEdgar, (edit conflict) IMD classify ARB 02 as an new system, plus Gulab didn't remain as a depression while crossing the Indian peninsula, instead it was downgraded to a WML day before yesterday. It makes clear sense that Gulab is not ARB 02. For simplifying compare this with Hurricane Grace and TS Marty Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 06:29, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

but i found the article here Cyclone Yemyin which is same here HurricaneEdgar 06:43, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneEdgar, Since the citation over the article of Cyclone Yemyin isn't working. We can't compare Yemyin with Potential Storm Shaheen Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 06:46, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's better to compare it with Hurricane Grace/Storm Marty, as the exact thing happened here also. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 06:47, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

if will better if @Meow: comment on this. -- HurricaneEdgar 06:58, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IMD still treats ARB 02 as Gulab in its satellite bulletins so people in IMD should have acknowledged that it’s the same system, but how Gulab and future-Shaheen should be treated on Wikipedia can be discussed further.  🐱💬 08:32, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meow, National Bulletin and RSMC bulletin don't do that, so that means IMD is basically treating ARB 02 as a separate system. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 09:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I used the term ‘acknowledged’.  🐱💬 09:43, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meow, I meant to say that the national bulletin and RSMC bulletin has acknowledged it as a separate system Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 09:53, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As per rsmc New Delhi, a name used once time, will not be used for the second time. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 10:09, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dam222, The name is the not the issue here, the issue is whether Gulab and ARB 02 are the same storm or not Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 10:14, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let's just wait and see how things develop rather than panicking over if it is or isn't the same storm. Jason Rees (talk) 11:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IMD revealed to media that it will be named Shaheen.  🐱💬 12:14, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It will make confused, the JTWC kept designated 03B and kept as same storm HurricaneEdgar 22:54, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneEdgar: Mate, since IMD is the official agency we'll use IMD designation not JTWC's. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 02:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They are the same storm, and they should be treated as such. However, per the IMD's designation system, the storm will get two sections in this article. Even the IMD has said that they have the same origin. Statistically, both phases of the storm will be treated as a single system (such as on Tropical cyclones in 2021). However, Gulab should have only a single article covering both phases of the storm, similar to Amanda/Cristobal and Cyclone Vardah. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 03:19, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gulab's remnants formed ARB 02. But it will be named a new name if it intensifies into a cyclonic storm (Shaheen). As @Beraniladri19: said, the JTWC is not the official RSMC, but the RSMC is IMD so we are using IMD's designation. Hurricane4235 (talk) 03:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

same discussion in 2016 North Indian Ocean cyclone season Link Talk:2016_North_Indian_Ocean_cyclone_season#Vardah_/_ARB_02 HurricaneEdgar 03:42, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LightandDark2000, Cyclone Vardah did cross over the Arabian Sea, but as a depression. Here in this case, Gulab is predicted to become Cyclone Shaheen. So then Cyclone Gulab-Shaheen i guess ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe that would work. But that's *if* the storm gets its own article. Otherwise, it'll have two sections in the season article. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 03:46, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LightandDark2000, There's a draft for Cyclone Gulab and a draft for Cyclone Shaheen Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Satellite Bulletin, Gulab and Shaheen are the same system. They should get the same article, though I'm not sure about the season sections. JavaHurricane 03:52, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should we merge Gulab and Shaheen? or Create a seperate article for Shaheen? Hurricane4235 (talk) 03:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JavaHurricane, But the RSMC bulletin and the National Bulletin doesn't acknowledge that, making it more confusing Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:59, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, the IMD consistently considered the WML that was the remnant of Gulab to have developed into Shaheen, according to the previous outlooks. They do recognise that Shaheen and Gulab are one and the same. And in any case, the Satellite Bulletins should be enough proof of the two storms being the same system. JavaHurricane 04:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricane4235: I think this discussion should go to the WPTC's talk page. The situation is very confusing just like Bulbul and Matmo in 2019 and Amanda and Cristobal in 2020. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 04:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now the DD had intensified into Cyclone Shaheen. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 04:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing confusing here. The IMD has been consistent in considering the two systems to be the same, as the satellite bulletins and the older RSMC bulletins around the time Gulab degenerated amply showed. As the IMD has clearly and officially said that Shaheen is the same cyclone as Gulab in its bulletins, they should have the same article. JavaHurricane 04:06, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JavaHurricane, Idk, but I don't think we had ever done like that. Any examples (other than Vardah and Amanda/Cristobal) Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 04:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since Shaheen is forecasted by the IMD and JTWC to strengthen to an equivalent of a severe tropical cyclone or even a very severe cyclonic storm, how will this work? Combining Gulab and Shaheen to one article or still a separate one? Shaheen is forecasted to traverse the Gulf of Oman, a rare occurrence. For me, we need to separate them. 🌀HurricaneParrot🐦 06:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HurricaneParrot, That's why this discussion should be shifted to the WPTC's talk page and more WPTC members. It's a sticky limbo Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 06:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is not true that we have never done that. There formerly used to be an arrangement at Cyclone Katrina which was earlier called Cyclone Katrina-Victor-Cindy. We have many cyclones with two names in the SHem (Cyclone Leon-Eline for example), and we also have Hurricane Cesar-Douglas, though admittedly, except Katrina, all these have multiple names due to basin crossovers. JavaHurricane 06:43, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JavaHurricane, So shall we start the merging the two drafts ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 06:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now are we merging Gulab and Shaheen or not? Hurricane4235 (talk) 07:16, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

so i check the Satellite Bulletin is true that Gulab, and Shaheen. is same storm Satellite Bulletin IMD HurricaneEdgar 06:52, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the other example of us considering two storms the same when the official forecasters considers them separate but related is Tropical storms Amanda and Cristobal. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: the JTWC kept the name Gulab and designation did not recognize as Shaheen HurricaneEdgar 09:47, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support for posible article Cyclone Gulab-Shaheen as JavaHurricane said According to the Satellite Bulletin, Gulab and Shaheen are the same system. They should get the same article in my opinion they should one article, clearly that is same storm also to prevent a confused the reader, because the JTWC did not recognize as Shaheen. HurricaneEdgar 11:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneEdgar: How many times do we have to tell ?? JTWC is NOT the official RSMC. The RSMC is IMD so we gonna follow whatever IMD says. Hurricane4235 (talk) 13:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the JTWC Is not RSMC fyi there are other cyclone not mention by IMD example Tropical Storm Vaimei also mention JTWC HurricaneEdgar 12:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IDK whether to merge Gulab and Shaheen. I will go with all of your opinions. Hurricane4235 (talk) 13:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, here is the draft for Cyclone Shaheen Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 11:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the discussion above, I think serious consideration should be given towards titling this Cyclone Gulab-Shaheen. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:32, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]