This is an archive of past discussions with User:A1Cafel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
May I ask you to back off from relisting discussions at RfD? You continue to relist several discussions that don't need to be relisted. I am also afraid you aren't conducting the proper due diligence by reading the discussions ahead of time to determine whether or not there is a consensus, given you relisted eight(!) discussions on 2019 May 13 within the span of a minute. Courtesy ping to Xezbeth, who has also expressed concern about your relisting today. --Tavix(talk)13:32, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Savannah
@B dash: Hi there. I just wanted to say thank you for all the excellent news articles you have managed to find for damages related to the Cyclone Savannah disaster in Indonesia! I think it's marvellous that you've been able to unearth this many sources. I have no idea how you did it—I couldn't find any when I did some Google searching last week. I have extended the damages section in the Savannah article, incorporating information from the references you found. Something I should clarify is that the fatality total for Savannah is actually 10, not 12. The article regarding the two deaths in Madiun actually states that the deaths were unrelated to the flooding event, and were simply due to illness (according to the police chief, I believe). I have mentioned this fact in the article (the sentence talking about not being able to be buried because of the flooded cemetery). Once again, thanks for all your work here. If you find any other sources with damage numbers, be sure to let me know so I can write it up! ChocolateTrain (talk) 13:48, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you!
The Citation Barnstar
You are most deserving of this! Thank you for your work providing so many references for damage totals and flooding impacts relating to the Cyclone Savannah disaster in Indonesia. Great effort! ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
June 2019 WPTC Newsletter
Volume XIV, Issue 39, May 31, 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 April 14–May 31, 2019. This edition's editor and author is Hurricane Noah (talk·contribs).
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.
History of tropical cyclone naming - The practice of using names to identify tropical cyclones goes back several centuries, with storms named after places, saints or things they hit before the formal start of naming in each basin. The credit for the first usage of personal names for weather systems is given to the Queensland Government MeteorologistClement Wragge, who named tropical cyclones and anticyclones between 1887 and 1907. This system of naming fell into disuse for several years after Wragge retired, until it was revived in the latter part of World War II for the Western Pacific basin. Over the following decades, various naming schemes have been introduced for the world's oceans, including for parts of the Atlantic, Pacific and the Indian Ocean. The majority of these lists are compiled by the World Meteorological Organization's tropical cyclone committee for the region and include names from different cultures as well as languages. Over the years there has been controversy over the names used at various times, with names being dropped for religious and political reasons. For example, female names were exclusively used in the basins at various times between 1945 - 2000 and were the subject of several protests. The names of significant tropical cyclones in the North Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean and Australian region are retired from the naming lists and replaced with another name, at meetings of the various tropical cyclone committees.
Storm of the month and other tropical activity
Cyclone Fani was an extremely severe cyclonic storm that made landfall in Odisha, India on May 3. The storm achieved peak intensity as a near Category 5-equivalent cyclone with 3-minute sustained winds of 215 km/h (130 mph), 1-minute sustained winds of 250 km/h (155 mph), and a minimum central pressure of 937 hPa (mbar). Fani caused over $1.8 billion (2019 USD) in damage in India and Bangladesh and killed at least 89 people.
Since the last newsletter, twelve systems have formed.
Southwest Indian Ocean
In the Southwest Indian Ocean, Cyclone Kenneth made landfall in Mozambique approximately 1 month after Cyclone Idai, causing widespread flooding and destruction. Overall, Kenneth killed at least 52 people and caused more than $100 million in damage. Additionally, Tropical Cyclone Lorna formed over the eastern portion of the basin in late April and dissipated in early May without affecting land.
Australian Region
In the Australian Region, cyclones Lili and Ann formed in early May and both affected land. No deaths were reported, although Lili caused moderate damage in the Maluku Islands and East Timor.
South Pacific
In the South Pacific, a tropical depression formed in mid-may, but failed to intensify and dissipated a few days later.
South Atlantic
In the South Atlantic, Subtropical Storm Jaguar formed in late May and lasted for approximately two days before becoming extratropical.
Western Pacific
In the Western Pacific, three weak tropical depressions existed during the first half of May.
North Atlantic
In the North Atlantic, Subtropical Storm Andrea formed on the same day as Jaguar, but failed to intensify and dissipated on the next day.
The Eastern Pacific hurricane season began on May 15.
The Atlantic hurricane season will begin at 2:00 AM EDT on June 1.
The Central Pacific hurricane season will begin sometime after 12:00 AM HST on June 1.
New WikiProject Members since the last newsletter in April 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 April 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!
Every year, editors new and old help maintain the new season of season articles. The older users are likely used to the standards of the project, such as how to Wikilink and reference properly. Newer users might make mistakes, and they might make them over and over again if they don't know better. If anyone (who happens to read this) comes across a new user, please don't bite, because with enough pushback, they'll decide that this group of editors is too mean, and unfun. This is all a volunteer project; no one can force anyone to do anything. We're all on here because of our love of knowledge and tropical cyclones. If you find someone new, consider using the official WPTC welcome template - Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Welcome.
I also encourage that if you know any tropical cyclone researchers, please speak up and try recruiting them to edit. Veteran editors can't keep editing forever. Life gets busy, and the real world beckons!
Yellow Evan has been involved with WPTC since 2008. Since the last newsletter, Yellow Evan has taken 5 typhoon articles to good article status as well as created 2 more. Overall, he has created and/or significantly contributed to more than 130 good articles. Your work in the Western Pacific Basin is invaluable... Thank you for your contributions!
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.
This section lists content that have become featured, articles and lists, since the past newsletter in mid-April 2019. From April 14–May 31, 2019, 1 featured article was promoted:
An awards program for the project began on May 31. It involves 25 levels that may be gained by earning points for completing various actions such as getting good or featured articles. Additional awards will be added in the future.
As of this news letter, there are more articles ranked a good article or better (1317) than articles ranked B-class or worse (1272), for the first time in the project's history.
Every Atlantic hurricane season from 1945 to 2007 is rated at least a GA. That is an impressive feat, and an incredibly body of work among many editors.
Cyclone Raja became the 150th featured article in the project. Thanks to all of the editors and their tireless edits for writing 2.7% of all of Wikipedia's featured articles.
In the 24 hours after Hurricane Michael's TCR was released, the article on the hurricane was edited 82 times by 18 different users.
In March 2019, the most popular article in the project was Cyclone Idai, viewed 231,969 times during the month. The generic cyclone was 2nd most popular, with 131,080 views. In 3rd place was Hurricane Katrina with 112,283 views. Included in the top 20 were the 2018 and 19 Atlantic hurricane seasons, hurricanes Michael, Florence, Irma, Maria, and Harvey, and the 1896 Cedar Keys hurricane, which was TFA on March 20th.
Tropical cyclones by year - from 2000 to present, there were 2,490 tropical cyclones of various intensity, causing a collective $1 trillion in damage and 200,000 deaths
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. As of this issue, there are 150 featured articles and 69 featured lists. There are 142 A-class articles, but that number is subject to change, depending if we mandate that all A-class articles have an A-class review first. There are 956 good articles, meaning it is possible we get to our 1000th GA by the end of the year. There are only 61 B-class articles, perhaps because because most articles of that quality already passed a GA review. There are 350 C-class articles, 720 start-class articles, and 141 stub-class articles, with 29 lists and 8 current articles. The number of lists may decrease further as the "Tropical cyclone X" articles continue to be reclassified as set index articles. These figures mean that nearly half of the project is rated a GA or better - including the lists/current/future articles, there are 1272 articles that are below GA status, versus 1317 that are GA or better.
WPTC 15th Anniversary push: some goals for the 15th year of WPTC include the creation or improvement of many other articles listed in the first section on the WPTC talk page.
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.
B dash, we both tend to work with a lot of US Federal Government photo sources from Flickr, so I see our work overlapping a lot, which is fine and totally par for the course. I notice however, that recently you seem to be replacing a few of the photos I've uploaded with similar versions that you uploaded. Most recently, I saw you replaced the TIP heroes group photo shot with a very similar one that also shows Ivanka Trump, which to me is entirely beside the point in illustrating the article. Many changes, like this one, are done without an edit summary, so it's not clear to me what advantage you see in adding a Trump to the photo or the like. I'm fine with having my photos replaced with better ones, but I have trouble seeing the logic in some recent swaps. If there is some reason you are replacing these, please let me know. If there is not some general reason, I'd request that you use edit summaries to indicate that you replaced a photo, and why the new photos are superior. MarginalCost (talk) 22:00, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Ways to improve Wooferendum
Hello, B dash,
Thanks for creating Wooferendum! I edit here too, under the username Newslinger and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Newslinger}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megan Abrigo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Slashme (talk) 14:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
TD Jenny
Please look at reliable sources such as PAGASA before reverting other users, as TD Jenny is already named. If you continue to do this, I will report you for vandalism. Thanks. Typhoon2013(talk)09:24, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps. However PAGASA updates their Twitter updates first and was published minutes before 09:00 UTC. Please do not do this again, and moreover, I have mentioned this in my edit summary. But still, you should not revert other people's edits with no valid explanation. Typhoon2013(talk)09:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
~ what is your problem ~ you can't change what I write or what I put into a article's talk page discussion. Do you really think you have the authority to do that ~ if you do not like the picture I used ~ since there is a already a discussion on the articles talk page, you should use proper protocol with the talk page ~ what you did deleting my conversation. is very poor editing. I reverted your edits on Hurricane Dorian's article and your deletion of my edit on the talk page ~ do not revert with out discussing or I will report you to the administrators ~ Regards ~mitch~ (talk) 14:19, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Reverting to a redirect is disruptive
Please note that reverting Humberto to a redirect is disruptive considering 2 others already did so and it was reverted both times. NoahTalk16:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I have indefinitely blocked you for violating one of your unblock conditions: "You must not edit at all except from this account." You have been persistently and abusively editing while logged out.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
SQL: I didn't use any IPs and other accounts for editing. I don't know perhaps the accidential logged-out counted or not. For example, I logged in in other Wikimedia project, but didn't get logged in at English Wikipedia while having a cross-wiki edit. Also, sometimes the Internet was error, the system may not detect my accounts and so it turns into the IP address. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
I haven't run a checkuser yet, and probably won't tonight. It's late. What Bbb23 mentioned above doesn't sound like it matches what you say here. SQLQuery me!04:29, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
It has been more than three months since I was blocked. In this three months, a lot of things happened. I'm doing great, so no need to worry about me. Regarding to the violating of unblock condition, perhaps I may be using IP sometimes unintentionally. As mentioned before, I often made cross-wiki activity. Sometimes the network may not be able to load my account, eventually using the IP to edit. Also, I move to a new college, but the network in the college is not good. Network error sometimes occurred. For the changing of the username, I just want to have a new start, and I have no means to escape any checking as I do have a number of edits after changing the username. I know this is not an excuse for violating the unblock condition. I have the responsibility to check the logging status before editing. In this cooling period, I check the logging status every time to avoid accidental log out. Regarding since I was unblocked in February 2018, I made lots of contribution to the Wikipedia. This period could prove my willingness to improve the society, rather than doing vandalism/disruptive editing. This is my main difference between those LTA. I hope I can be unblocked with the monitoring of the logging status. If the admins believe that it is unacceptable, then I have nothing to said, and I'm willing to accept the sanctions for a longer time. I wish all editors living happily, and wish all of them a Happy New Year.
Decline reason:
So, an editor with a past history of abuse of multiple accounts, abusive editing without logging in, and lying about doing so, "accidentally" edited without logging in yet again, frequently enough and in such ways as to raise enough suspicions for a CheckUser to be run. Then, when that editor has been blocked again, other people, unconnected to that person, make edits which look to Bbb23, an experienced and competent CheckUser, so much like editing by that person that he states as a fact that it was them. Hmm. Yes, it could happen, but no, it doesn't look remotely likely. Give you the benefit of the doubt? Unfortunately you used up all your credit in that respect long ago, when you were persistently dishonest, were given more chances, and were dishonest again. Two years ago you were given a last chance, and you decided to blow that chance; you don't keep on getting more and more last chances. You were given clear conditions for being unblocked, you chose to violate those conditions, and what is more you now choose not even to accept that you did so. That's the end, as far as I am concerned. JBW (talk) 16:24, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
I have no edits on English Wikipedia since then. As mentioned before, I moved to a new college called Chinese University of Hong Kong. At first I don't want to say it due to privacy, but in order to facilitate the unblock, I have no choice. I do have login in CUHK, and I also noted that there are a number of edits using IP in CUHK. Is {{Shared IP edu}} affect the above results? --A1Cafel (talk) 15:04, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
The only way I would consider unblocking you is with a 1 account restriction, only from this account and no clean starts. But Bbb23's comment gives me pause --Guerillero | Parlez Moi05:44, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
It seems that Bbb23 misunderstand my statement. In the unblock request, I have admitted that I use IPs previously. To be honest, I have stopped editing after the re-block. I'm puzzled that why there is IP edits associated with my account. Simply checking the nearby IPs may not be accurate. Maybe the checkusers can take them out, and compare with my editing behaviour. As 2019-nCoV is threathening all around the world, I hope everyone is safe and stay healthy. Compared with three years ago, I become more calm. Even the request was declined, I won't feel bad, and I won't have hard feelings to anyone. I have find someplace for me to contribute Wikipedia in a proper way. Hope everyone has a nice time. --A1Cafel (talk) 14:40, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi! I see that you requested a deletion in one of my older images. I opposed, as it is clearly my work, used in a few articles. Yes, it is from Facebook as you claimed, however it is definitely from me. Typhoon2013(talk)07:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello, A1Cafel. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hurricane Helene (2018), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages.
hello, A1Cafel! i noticed that you nominated a number of pictures on commons of the zunda towers for deletion because latvia does not freely permit the commercial use of images of works of architecture protected by copyright, which i was sad to learn about. however, after some digging, i learned that en wikipedia "[b]asically ... accept[s] images of buildings and structures taken anywhere in the world", according to wp:fop. i am assuming that this means that there are no issues with hosting these images on en wikipedia. do you agree? if so, would you mind copying these files over to en wikipedia? i cannot seem to figure out how to do it (or even figure out if it is possible to do so), and am guessing that you are far more familiar with commons than i am.
also, i just noticed that two of the files nominated were uploaded by Spi-group, an account that was presumably operated by the spi group. this group is involved with the zunda towers project, and i am assuming that they have the right to reproduce images of the towers for commercial purposes. as spi-group has noted that these two photos are their own work, and they have licensed both photos under cc by-sa 4.0, would this be considered sufficient to have them both remain on commons? the two photos in question are named "3Q Z-Towers facade .jpg" and "Z-Towers .jpg". dying (talk) 10:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
It has been a really, really long time since my last time been here. I was blocked due to violating one of my editing restriction "one account restriction". Now I understand that the restriction means that I can only edit using this account, logged-out edits are also disallowed. I will make use of the "keep me logged in" function to avoid any accidental logged-out. I will check the logging status every time before I submit an edit, as this is my resposbility. Since I was unblocked in February 2018, I made lots of useful edits to the Wikipedia, mainly in the area of tropical cyclones, in which I will stick in if I get unblocked, because I have a strong interest in it. The past contribution could prove my willingness to build the encyclopedia and improve the community, rather than making vandalism or disruptive editing. I won't mind waiting for a longer time until I get unblocked. If I get unblocked, I'm willing to accept a stricter editing restriction if necessary. I will also accept probation from others on my edits. Have a nice day and all the best.
Decline reason:
I echo JBW's prior unblock request. You were given clear conditions, you violated them. You had your second chance and blew it. I don't see a path forward for you here. Yamla (talk) 12:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
