User talk:Thegreatdr/2006archive

Helpful Hints from Others

AHS articles

Try to add inline sources (like this [1]) for anything new you write in the AHS articles. I know there are no sources there now, but in the long run we want everything to have inline sources. — jdorje (talk) 00:56, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2003-04 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone season

You can't copy and paste information like that. Also, Elita and Frank's summaries are too long as they are. If you can, you should summarize them. This would solve both problems. Hurricanehink 01:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

As no one has done so... Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! Titoxd^(?!? - help us) 02:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Doc. Do these work for the article? Titoxd^(?!? - help us) 20:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I was looking for. It's nice to see my old work again. Thanks Titoxd! 20:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi David! I saw your recent work on the Weather front page; well done! I'm surprised I haven't run into you before, and it's great to have you on the project. I'm going to be graduating in a couple weeks (you can read all the details on my user page), and I'm in the process of applying to several NWS WFOs. I doubt I'll end up in Camp Springs, though (I wouldn't enjoy the winters very much). Anyway, I look forward to talking to you and working with you in the future. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 17:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.- I'm considering applying to the current opening in Lake Charles- would you recommend it?

Thanks for your response. I look forward to seeing your continued great work on Wikipedia...thanks for all your help! EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 17:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Good job on trawling through the CLASS archive and finding those pics of East Pacific storms. However if you could provide a little more information when you upload them, it will help a great deal. As an example of what could be added compare the image description of Hurricane Daniel (1982) to that of Tropical Storm Aletta (2006). With the satellite imagery a link to the archive homepage is probably the best place to give a link to (if there isn't an image description page) and a time, date and location are provided in the summary the precise image can be found easily enough (I'd like to see them :)). In the case of your rainfall images I suppose you might actually be uploading the original image, but a link to your page on that storm on the HPC site would be nice.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can include the web address as part of the image description? I can do that from now on, I guess. Thegreatdr 18:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image description pages use the same code as all the other pages; if you type [http://www.class.noaa.gov/ CLASS archive] you will get CLASS archive. Hope that helps clarify things.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a collector of online hurricane images (I have pics for over 200 different cyclones), I am very envious of you. That CLASS site seems to want money for their images, which I dislike very much. I'm in the process of rebuilding my image archive after my hard drive crashed back in May (some data I recovered). I once had every Atlantic storm back to 1980 plus '77 and '78, EPac back to '83, and WPac back to '91. Do you know of any secret stashes that might help me out? (I use mainly GIBBS, HSEI, OSEI, DMSP, NRL, MODIS and EO Natural Hazards as well as the Monthly Weather Review and NOAA's photo library). Thanks! -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 21:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos

Awards

Good work

I must say, you've done some good things to some hurricane articles here. Few users actually write for things outside of 2005 or the Atlantic, and I was glad to see work done on some EPAC seasons and 1990s Atlantic. From Wikipedia hurricane contributor to another, I must say well done so far, and keep up the good work. Some of us hurricane writers have created a wikiproject for tropical cyclones, and if you're interested, feel free to join. We could use more writers like yourself. See you around. Hurricanehink 15:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I added a bit of new information to the 18th and early 19th century, from some old research I had lying around. 2357, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, the wikiproject is in your debt

File:Hand with thumbs up.jpg

I think Hink was looking for this...

Awesome work in updating the older tropical cyclone seasons with the re-analyzed data, and, most importantly, great job in adding the sources. :) (insert thumbs up) Hurricanehink (talk) 18:32, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm following the pre source format jdorje spoke to me about back in January or February. It was becoming clear that people either were resistent to pre's, or just didn't want to source, their material. Thegreatdr 19:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not only the WikiProject, but Wikipedia in general. I just saw the work you had on Max Mayfield, and the Atlantic hurricane reanalysis project, and was very impressed, and very thankful. Titoxd^(?!?) 17:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know...

I find it strange that you've done all this work and no one's given you a barnstar yet. Therefore...

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For the incredible amount of effort you've put into the tropical cyclone wikiproject. :D Coredesat talk! 03:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I second this barnstar. I was actually planning on giving you one later today, believe it or not. Thanks for all your hard work! EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 04:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thirded with a nomination for WPTC member of the month. – Chacor 05:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys. Thegreatdr 14:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WPTC Member of the month

WikiProject Tropical cyclones, awards you this Cyclone Barnstar for your contributions to the knowledge of TC Rainfall. 00:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

You were selected by the WikiProject as the October 2006 Member of the month. To see the full award read the October 2006 newsletter. Congratulations! You certainly deserve it for all you hard work :)--Nilfanion (talk) 00:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As promised (though admittedly, it's not a barnstar as such...)

		Great Editing Award
		OK, its an award that I've just constructed especially for this, but your work on Extratropical cyclone is, and has been, exceptional. Crimsone 15:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go

		The Surreal Barnstar
		This is for you using Wikipedia in great ways to escape for your daily work. Oh wait a sec.... :) Great job with everything. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

DYK - Fiji Meteorological Service

On 12 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fiji Meteorological Service, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

DYK - Atlantic hurricane reanalysis

On 29 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Atlantic hurricane reanalysis, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Many thanks for the contribution -- Samir धर्म 01:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK: Thanksgiving 1984 Nor'easter

On 20 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thanksgiving 1984 Nor'easter, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK!: Late November 2006 Nor'easter

On 25 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Late November 2006 Nor'easter, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Aksi_great (talk) 18:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did You Know? Great Appalachian Storm of November 1950

On 29 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Great Appalachian Storm of November 1950, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

. --GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK: New Year's Eve 1963 snowstorm

On 1 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article New Year's Eve 1963 snowstorm, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

(on behalf of Sandstein) BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK: 2004 Christmas Eve Snowstorm

On December 5, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2004 Christmas Eve Snowstorm, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks very much greatdr! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? Abbott Lawrence Rotch

On 7 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Abbott Lawrence Rotch, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 15:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? Xavier William Proenza & Tropical Cyclone Observation

On 10 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Xavier William Proenza, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 10 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tropical cyclone observation, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know about the Shamal (wind)?

On 13 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shamal (wind), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- Well done on another great article! GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 01:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK - Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre

On December 15, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Hello The Greatdr and thankyou for creating this interesting article. Titoxd kindly nominated your article for inclusion. Feel free to self-nom in future. Keep stormin'...Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry (2004 WPAC season)

Wow, I'm really sorry about the 2004 season. Just for the record, it wasn't entirely my fault. My computer or internet explorer sometimes doesn't update at random times, so when I wrote that last message, I didn't see the changes you made. Good work with the season, though wording still needs to be improved in places. The UTC shouldn't be used, mainly because it isn't on any other article. The month/date (May 17) format is preferred. Hurricanehink (talk) 16:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok. After reading some of the other user talks, I realized I probably should have collaborated with you better/more since you appear to have originated the page; wikipedia is still new to me and I was foreign to the concept. I'll go to your talk page and ask about date assignation...I'm assuming it would be in local time if it is not in UTC. User talk:thegreatdr 01:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, no problem. For dates, you can just take off the time, and put a month in the front. For example, if the month was August, and it was 12/1800 UTC, you can just put August 12. You don't have to do the month for every one if you don't want to. You could just say the 12th, provided the month is mentioned previously in the storm summary. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Measurement of precipitation

Thanks for adding this section at Precipitation (meteorology), but it is US-POV and incomprehensible to anyone outside of the US; please see the talk page, notably the point raised by RolandG at 10:37, 13 Jul 2004, and follow-up. It should also follow standard 3rd person prose; phrases like 'you can ...', 'your ...' are not suitable for an encyclopedia (basically, the word "you" shouldn't appear) - thanks, MPF 16:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject stuff

Sorry for bothering you again but I hope you don't mind too much. First thing is a request, as you are a TC WikiProject member you will receive the WikiProject Newsletter according to your preference on the mailing list, could you add your username to the appropriate section there? The other thing is a comment about storms - I'm trying to get a list of every named tropical cyclone worldwide (to set up the disambiguation pages correctly) - I suppose I'm going to have to resort to books for that, unless I can find a convenient list. I find it interesting that one of the few cyclones I can find from the past in the southern hemisphere is Denise in 1966, did it really drop that much rain?--Nilfanion (talk) 22:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, its not as bad as you might think, since that message I managed to find the SW Indian and Australian data, so I've got the full list of used names for the N Hemisphere, the SW Indian and the Australians. However I'm not sure about when naming began in the S Pacific (Fuji AOR), I can trace names back to 1984 there, but that's just the year the JTWC first took an interest, I have no reason to think they were not named before that. Apart from that I'm clear on it now. I'm curious about those heavy rainfalls in Reunion - did Denise and Hyacinthe really drop as much as that?--Nilfanion (talk) 08:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, seems like a lot of rain though!--Nilfanion (talk) 20:16, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks, for that.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

Yeah, I completely missed your rainfall climatology article. Interesting, and I had no clue North Dakota or Washington had ever gotten rain from a tropical cyclone (but not Montana, huh), and that Floyd had drenched the northeast so much. It would be nice to get more folks on here, especially from the NHC/TPC, and of course from the HPC. When did y'all first take notice of our tropical cyclone article work here on Wikipedia? --Golbez 20:29, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: May 2004 "Tropical Wave" Over Haiti

Yea, that storm is very annoying. It looked very subtropical at times. Sometimes, the NHC is too conservative in naming things, like the October Subtropical Storm in 2000. If they had named it, people would have probably paid more attention to the storm. It's a shame that 2000 people died in that storm, yet few even know it happened. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Debby (2000)

I have discovered through sattelite imagery on GIBBS that Hurricane Debby of 2000 is the same system as this unofficial subtropical cyclone you wrote about. Since you are part of the government, is there any way you can get the info to the NHC? Plus, you should make a rainfall graph for the subtropical storm out of those daily rainfall graphics. Take a look at the GIBBS thing youself, it's amazing that it restrengthened into a subtropical cylone. íslenska hurikein #12_(samtal) 19:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IH, you don't know for sure they're one and the same, so don't use that kind of grammar... NSLE 19:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply to islenska separately, but this would apply to any other similar requests. Even though some of the same cloud mass seemed to pass from one system to the other, I remember watching Debby's low level circulation die in real-time across the northwest Caribbean well to the west-southwest of its old thunderstorm activity. Remember, it has to be the same trackable low pressure center to be the same cyclone. Thegreatdr 19:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to but in, but what about Lee, Isidore, Lili, Chantal, Dean, Erin, Felix, Mitch, Nicole, and all other tropical cyclones that lost their low level circulation, then reformed? Hurricanehink (talk) 20:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I didn't see low level center. Forget my comment then. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If they truly did, then this has to be addressed when the hurricane reanalysis gets to the 2000's. Just because TPC drops a system as a tropical depression doesn't mean it no longer has a closed isobar or a spot low associated with it; it just means it no longer has a closed wind circulation. TPC stated this low policy several years ago, and I was just restating it for you. Thegreatdr 20:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Just curious, what's your opinion on Ivan after it made landfall? If it were up to you, how would Ivan's track continued; to the south like it does, or to the northeast to Canada? There's evidence for either way. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

South, since it follows the same low. I know the Germans handled it differently, and others thought similarly trying to follow the upper level portion, but you have to follow the same low. It follows the same logic that was used during Allison (1989), and I'm all for consistency. Thegreatdr 20:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, just curious. Hurricanehink (talk) 21:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But can you still make a total rainfall map for the unnamed subtropical storm anyway? Please ;) íslenska hurikein #12_(samtal) 15:41, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm surprised I haven't already. Will get to it that next week. Thegreatdr 15:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

..

Also, I believe you have a different highest rainfall on the rainfall pic for Debby than what the NHC says. And, I've also heard that in the interior mountains of Puerto Rico, there was 17 inches of rain, but that's unofficial. Also, I was wondering if you could make a rainfall graph like Hurricane Lenny, which includes some non-US places, because the Debby article has some foreign measurement. And before I forget, did Hurricane Klaus cause any rain in Puerto Rico? And I heard Hurricane Dolly (1996) caused heavy rain in Texas. Do you have any measurements for that? OK, that's all. íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 12:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty please? íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 20:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Irene

Just curious, are you going to add a peak total for Hurricane Irene (1999)? Also, you're missing a 10+ inch total in Virginia/North Carolina. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #2

The July issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:55, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

I meant officially dude and I was kidding. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 18:26, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrometeorological Prediction Center

Hey, I have a request that you are ideally placed to fulfill. Wikipedia's HPC article does not have any images in it and I had a look through the website but couldn't find any. Therefore this is a request for you to take a camera into work, and take some photos. Worthwhile things would be the exterior of the building, the main work areas or any other interesting features. Then when you upload them if you could tag them with one of the free licenses or the public domain option, Wikipedia can have some good imagery of the HPC :)--Nilfanion (talk) 23:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #3

The August issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Public Predictions", etc.

I share a similar opinion to you about the value of those predictions and the possible negative consequences. That is why I made this suggestion. Basically the talk pages would be much more strictly controlled to be related to the important stuff, what has happened and what the NHC (or whoever) predict. However, there is a large interest in the discussion of the season (both the mindless predictions and the more sensible stuff). If it is removed to subpages of the WikiProject, as I suggested, it is probably far enough removed from the articles that anyone who sees it would understand its not that serious but just kids being kids. Do you think that would be a workable solution? With any luck, the more frivolous stuff should be deleted completely. By the way, if you give out an email address on a talk page it will always be visible through the page history, it would be better to use the email feature built into Wikipedia (set it up through Special:Preferences). Its probably also an idea to set up a throwaway account for that purpose, as opposed to using your personal (or work) address.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, well, I can't really think of anything I'd say differently than what I've already said before. I just doubt that it will compromise anybody's work, and I'm pretty sure that few people will take it seriously. And I'm just curious to know how these few predictions would make Gary Padgett's work any less reliable or professional, even if Wikipedia is referenced? Maybe it's just a difference of opinion, but I don't think the reliability or professionalism of anything will be compromised by this. Now, ridiculous predictions like "this next blob is going into an area very favorable for development, I think it's going to be a cat 5!" is riduculous, but I'm arguing that something along the line of "this invest could become TD4 soon" (as has been said on that page) or "this could be very powerful once it gets into the Guld of Mexico" (mentioning Katrina or something) are okay. These would be predictions based off of official NHC forecasts, and they'd be realistic, as well. Also, I think could is a much more acceptable term to use than will, since that would mean the person doing the predicting (more like speculating the possibilities in this case) wouldn't set his prediction in stone. Saying something like "this invest will almost certainly become the next tropical depression" I believe are acceptable as well, but I could understand how other people would see a problem with them. I think using the word could instead of will fixes many of the problems the predictions had (although "this blob could become a category 5!" would still probably be unnaceptable).

And don't worry, you don't have to worry about squelching my interest in meterology. That could never happen. bob rulz 00:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for sending me that message. Don't worry, it's all fine with me. I don't come on Wikipedia to deliberately make predictions (come to think of it, I hardly make that many), it's just that every now and then they may just come out naturally. That's what I'm worried about - a crackdown on even a trivial comment such as "this could be a major hurricane". Of course, I'm completely against the notion of talk pages being completely hijacked as such and will passionately back any efforts to clamp down on prediction-spamming. Cheers. :)

(P.S. I wouldn't worry too much about respectable organisations using Wikipedia - after all, we DO use respectable sources ourselves. They would be very foolish to be bothered about what is written on the talk page. Thanks again) Pobbie Rarr 01:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Reanalysis project

Ooooh thats mean, hinting at the reanalysis and other confidential info like that (not that I mind) :) Do you have any idea when the next batch of reanalysis data is likely to be released? I could ask if there's any interesting highlights (for example was Hurricane Ethel really a cat 5?) but I understand the confidentiality so would be suprised if you gave a concrete answer...--Nilfanion (talk) 23:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering, I figure you would like a quiet 2006 in a professional sense to enable you to carry on with your rainfall project without much interruption from the current year (wanting it quiet as a human being goes without saying). Oh and a random question; I was fiddling round with the rainfall maps from TS Allison to see what might work best for Wikipedia and when I looked more closely I noticed TN didn't have any data. Is that a typical annoying gap in the information for you?--Nilfanion (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mike (1950) and Kendra (1966)

Damn, alright. However, given that someone in your position said it, I'm fairly confident it's correct. :) Hurricanehink (talk) 21:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a shame. Well, don't they already have 1915 to 1930 more or less done (based on .pdf from Hurdat)? If that's right, hopefully it wouldn't take too much longer to get to 1950. In your opinion, how much longer will the entire re-analysis take? Hurricanehink (talk) 21:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oy. I'd conservatively estimate another 5-10 years. The end always seems to be 3 years away, and it's been a decade long project so far. Thegreatdr 21:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! That's hard to believe. Hopefully it will be more like 5 years, but even that's a long project. While we're on the subject, do you know if they are considering extending the best track to 1700? I read an interesting article on the Hurdat page for a re-analysis from 1700 to 1855, though it doesn't give any tracks. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! It's a shame that it will take a while, but I'm glad they're considering that. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, especially some of the 1-advisory storms from 1851-1855 as well as the 1821 Long Island and New York Hurricane, which I always doubted was one storm from Guadeloupe to NY in 3 days. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Always interesting to hear some inside gossip on the reanalysis ;) One question though, do you have any idea if the reanalysis project intends to look at either "Hurricane Huron" or any of the Mediterranean storms?--Nilfanion (talk) 17:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds about right... Personally, I wouldn't be completely shocked if 2005 loses its most active season status as a result of the reanalysis of some other. season :P I can't find any reference to those storms in Jack Beven's weekly summaries, if I could I would add it to the talk page.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a copy of the September 1992 summaries, see if he mentions it. Around September 12th, I believe; should have been Bonnie (at least). I showed it to him in real-time that Saturday, and I believe he's the one who wrote it up for the re-analysis. I'd heard early last year that 1933 was likely to end up with 19 systems after that year was reanalyzed. I don't think a past year will touch the 2005 record. Thegreatdr 17:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well in my copy of it I don't see it. I got hold of them through Gary Padgett, who sent me an edited version (he concatenated the summaries of each basin together to make it more readable). Its possible that he missed these systems.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He may have been cautious and not added the September image. Jack was a relatively new employee at TAFB/NHC around that time frame. I'm finding the CLASS image...it's around September 12. Thegreatdr 18:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice pics, from my (limited) perspective I can certainly see some subtropical nature to it. It could be Jack's inexperience that led to its exclusion from the Weekly summary (or possibly he couldn't be bothered with the EPac activity at that time). And I agree with you on 2005, its almost certainly going to keep the record. By the way, when are you going to get Beryl's rainfall done?--Nilfanion (talk) 18:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East Pacific

Do you have any idea about if and when the HURDAT for the east Pacific will be reanalysed? I'm not a meteorologist, but when I see a track like Image:Kanoa 1957 track.png (that really is the HURDAT), I know something is wrong...--Nilfanion (talk) 08:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TD9 of 1987

Arleady have that.That's where i found it actually-i wanted 8,10,11,12 & 13.HurricaneCraze32 18:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with those. I was tracking tropical systems then as a hobby in high school, and I don't remember those depressions! Thegreatdr 18:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That helps.I can't write anything about them if i dont know anything about them.HurricaneCraze32 18:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well did you find them?HurricaneCraze32 17:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, HurricaneCraze. DR has a job, you know ;) (Side comment to DR: I was looking through the HPC products, and joked that you need to type in full words' :P) Chacor 17:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HPC Tropical Cyclone Rainfall Project

Instead of giving external links to reach rainfall graphics for hurricanes (external links should not be embedded like that unless absolutely necessary, since wikipedia is designed to stand "on its own" without access to the internet), you should take those images and upload them to Wikipedia commons (categorize them somewhere under the Tropical cyclones category), and include them directly in the articles as thumbnails. The images I've seen you link to are all from NOAA, so they are public domain and you can freely upload them to commons. — jdorje (talk) 20:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response: The reason I'm concerned about uploading the rainfall images is that they are still being occasionally updated with information when previously unknown rainfall mesonet information becomes available. This is more true of the more recent storms (e.g. 2005) than back in the 1980's due to few rainfall mesonets being available back then. How do I upload the images into the commons?

Looks like you're uploading them now. But you should also include them in the articles (at least for storm articles, maybe not for season articles), rather than just linking to them. — jdorje (talk) 23:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've figured it out. The help wasn't helpful...so I looked at a page that showed me the format. I think I'm doing as you request.

Yep, good work. Only thing is you need to include a link to the source (preferably the HTML page) of the images when you upload the images (i.e., it should be on the image page). — jdorje (talk) 23:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding some of them in. If possible, could you go back and categorize some of them for easier access? All you have to do is put [[Category:1980s Atlantic hurricane impacts|Charley]], for example. You would have to change the decade and storm, but it's really easy and helpful. Thanks in advance. Hurricanehink 21:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I suppose I could figure this out for myself by trawling through the HPC's website but if you know the answers to these queries it would save me time, when you just want to know how much rainfall there was from Hurricane Katrina its overwhelmed by the other stuff. Anyway a couple of quick queries: Does the HPC publish rainfall information on tropical cyclones beyond this type of page, the info which gets incorportated into the NHC's TCR and the advisories? And does the HPC take any interest in impact outside of the United States (Hurricanes Mitch and Stan being obvious examples here). Thanks and welcome to Wikipedia, your contributions are certainly appreciated.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I think the Katrina question was confusion on my part, the URL of the HPC advisories on the 2005 storms had been altered (and I couldn't find them at first). Between that and the TCR I think most rainfall data is covered. On the non-US storms I was wondering if the HPC produced images, like this one for Katrina for the non-US impact areas. If the HPC collates the data for climatological purposes, which I guess a component of your current work, I expect the same type of data which is used to produce those graphics is also available to the HPC for the other countries. If you look at a typical (recent) hurricane article, you can see we like those graphics here on Wikipedia. Thanks for clearing that up for me.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I can see it is the lack of non-US data at this time which restricts such information being collated (is it by you personally?) I can see you would like to have such information for the non-US areas and publish it; its just that it is much harder to get hold of. Good luck with your work and thanks for explaining that for me.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question. In the future, does the HPC plan on adding rainfall data for Hawaii? Also, how far back are they going to go in the Atlantic? I think the rainfall data has been expanding at an impressive pace, and can't wait to see more! Hurricanehink (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're the only one?!?! That's insane. Awesome job!!!! I just think it's pretty quickly because I notice a few new storms every time I go in there (about every 2 weeks). The Puerto Rican rainfall data was done quickly, as well. Glad to hear Hawaii will be done eventually. So what's next on board for the project, if you don't mind me asking? Are you gonna do more Carib storms, or continue going in backwards chronological order? Hurricanehink (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool, and good luck. For the Texas storms, why can't you do something like the Subtropical Storm of 1994 or 2000? Neither were officially storms in the Hurdat, but there was rainfall info for them. Hopefully 79 to 82 won't be too bad. I notice you are doing Javier's Mexican rainfall. Very cool. Good luck finding other Mexican data. Hurricanehink (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea. I have a question. How do you know what rainfall comes from a tropical system, and what doesn't? How do you know if it was an outer rainband of the storm, or just a different system? Oh yea, and sorry for bugging you about all of this. I just find your work fascinating. If I'm asking too many questions, feel free to ignore. ;) Hurricanehink (talk) 02:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I might have found a small error for Hurricane Edouard (1996). The page indicates rainfall of above 3 inches, but you should probably mention the fact that West Dennis, MA received over 6 inches. I am mentioning this because there's no rainbar thing for 5+ inches. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:09, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I would imaging it would be very difficult. That sounds pretty confusing as well! Glad you'll get Edouard. I have a question about Bonnie in 2004 then, just to double check. The National Climatic Data Center said that moisture from Bonnie contributed to rainfall, resulting in rainfall totals of around 5 inches in Pennsylvania. However, there's no rainfall indicated for Pennsylvania on the Bonnie page. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, ok. Here's the NCDC page that says that. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that does make sense, then. I was just double checking, but I see your method. I suppose it can probably get really confusing on your part, so good luck in the future. I would guess Puerto Rico, Florida, and south Texas are the easiest for you, then. Hurricanehink (talk) 18:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice :) Hurricanehink (talk) 22:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• You may be interested in this paper I found... Titoxd^(?!?) 03:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Hmm... that's sad. :( By the way, I've been meaning to ask, we've been trying to get the Tropical cyclone ready for Featured article candidates, but it has to go through Peer review first. However, we were also trying to get it externally peer reviewed before that, by someone from NOAA/NHC/TPC. How would one go about doing that? (Perhaps the worst time to do that, with Tropical Storm Alberto around...) Titoxd^(?!?) 05:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Importance

Yeah, I'm sorry if it offends you - read this discussion on the wikiproject page (its fairly long I'm afraid). There are four levels of importance Top, High, Mid and Low. Top-class importance is only for things which really should be in a print encyclopedia and Low importance is very minor stuff, with High and Mid somewhere in between. The importance rating should be fairly static and irrespective of article quality. Ultimately, I have made a subjective assessment of all the wikiproject's pages, and I expect that I got a few wrong. Tropical cyclone rainfall climatology will become a very good quality page (I think it may need to be split seeing how much data there) and could reach featured status in the future. Thinking about it some more, it could well be High-importance class. I'll mention it on the articles talk page and see what others think.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed some rainfall images don't have links to the information that was used to create them. Thus, there may be a problem with your rainfall images, being that of Wikipedia's rule forbidding original research. Is the information you are using to create these images available online and can be linked to for verifiability? I was also wondering what program you use to make your rainfall images, and whether or not it would be possible to upload your images in the PNG format instead of GIF. PNG is generally preferred over GIF except in cases of animation. These are minor issues, but could present problems down the road.

Besides all that, thanks for adding the informative maps. --tomf688 (talk - email) 02:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay just checking; thanks. --tomf688 (talk - email) 11:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you had a good vacation (or whatever it was you did away from work). By the way, will you redo Cindy's rainfall page on the HPC to show the fact it was a hurricane? (and other similar things...)--Nilfanion (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2004 Gaston on the HPC is a hurricane according to the heading but a TS according to the graphic...--Nilfanion (talk) 16:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that may be because it was a TS when it affected the USA. How come Mitch has green text though, that seems odd. By the way you might want to check out commons:Category:Tropical cyclone rainfall - see all your work. :P--Nilfanion (talk) 18:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mitch (1998) and Cindy (2005) are changed on the website. Some years ago when the project started, green text was used for titles. I didn't realize any graphics with green titles had survived the past 5-6 years. Thegreatdr 02:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Texas max. rainfall - Amelia (1978)

Just to let you know, your maxima rainfall per state graphic needs to be update. 45 inches of rain fell in Texas from Amelia of 1978 or something, but the maxima per state thing says Allison produced the most rain in Texas; 40 inches. So yea. Also, the maximum rainfall from Hurricane Debby (2000) is 12.63 inches (32 cm) in Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico, not 12.16 inches. So, could you plz fix that, too. And speaking of Debby, there are some unnofficial reports of up to 17 inches of rain in the interior mountains of Puerto Rico. Is there anyway you can confirm this? If you can, that would be great. P.S. I hope Tropical Storm Beryl's rainfall graphic is coming along. íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 21:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's weird, the rain I got felt like more than one inch. So, do you have any info on Chris in Puerto Rico? íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 02:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alberto (2006) rainfall

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this, but I thought I would just ask anyway. Are you able to change something on Alberto of this year's rainfall graphic thingy? Where I live (coastal NH), we received a small amount of rain (less than an inch). But it's not on the map with rainfall from Alberto. So are you able to add it to the map? íslenska hurikein #12_(samtal) 00:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note on Beryl & Chris (2006)

Since a few of you have asked, here's an answer. I normally produce pages for systems that have produced an inch or more of rain onto the lower 48 as well as the Caribbean U.S. dependencies. This means there will not be a graphic/page for Beryl. Chris may be another matter, though. I'll look into it...it occurred while I was on vacation. Thegreatdr 02:35, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Florence includes rain down to 0.50 inches, how come? íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 20:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marty (2003)

I remember reading something about the conditions that you needed to make an image of a tropical cyclone's precipitation distribution... but I can't find it now. :( Is there any chance we could get an image for Marty? It struck the northeastern Sonora coast before moving onto the US, and dropped over two inches of rain on Arizona while still tropical, so does it qualify? Titoxd^(?!?) 06:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erika (2003)

Just curious, will you be doing a map for this storm eventually? Mainly I was curious if the precursor disturbance dropped heavy, or even light rainfall across Florida. Hurricanehink (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm planning on doing a graphic for Mexico. I'll check to see if I've created a spreadsheet for Florida...I think I already have. If the rainfall isn't online now, it will be when the Mexican rainfall is added in. Thegreatdr 22:35, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very cool, thanks. Hurricanehink (talk) 23:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas (2003)

I'm sorry to bother you, but would Tropical Storm Nicholas in 2003 qualify for inclusion in the rainfall project? I understand (per Gary Padgett report) that you heard it might be treated an unnumbered depression, but due to Nicholas's complex role in the wave that moved across Florida in early November 2003, would that eventually get a map? I've been doing some research on the storm to better the Nicholas article, but it's very difficult finding info on the storm. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably put in the Nicholas article, as the existing Nicholas article is very short. True, it wasn't Nicholas, per se, but that's probably the best place to put on a WPTC article. Thanks for letting me know there wasn't much rain with the low. That makes me more comfortable (I was trying to find a lot of information on the low, but it makes sense why there isn't much). Thanks for the info. Hurricanehink (talk) 18:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diana (1984)

Just curious, how come the rainfall for Diana is only for North Carolina? According to the 1984 Monthly Weather Review, portions of northeastern Florida recieved over 3 inches of rain. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check that out. Thegreatdr 18:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ex-NHC forecasters

Hi there. I'm doing an article on 2002's Hurricane Kyle (and am done), but I'm having a problem with the citations/referencing as it appears "Forecaster Lawrence" is no longer with the NHC. Would you happen to know his/her first initial so I can put it in? Thanks. Chacor 09:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

His first name is Miles. Thegreatdr 10:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Chacor 10:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more question, sorry, in some of the advisories it's listed "Pasch/Mainelli". Is this the same Mainelli currently listed at our National Hurricane Center article? Cheers. Chacor 10:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is Michelle. Thegreatdr 11:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! :) Chacor 11:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:1911.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1911.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Just a comment - this image is an duplicate of Image:1911 Atlantic hurricane season map.png (which has a better name).--Nilfanion (talk) 15:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I did not know that. I already went through the process of tagging the image. D'oh! Thegreatdr 15:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1987 Pacific hurricane season

If you have time and are able to do so, could you please add information to, or tell me where to find, information on the 1987 Pacific hurricane season. I tried searching AMS Journals for info and couldn't find any information. I am also totally clueless as to why the name "Knut" was retired/changed to "Kenneth". Any help or information is much appreciated. Thank you. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #4

The September issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 01:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I notice the two new images you added say they were a storm impacting Sri Lanka. However, the season article is Pre-1980 Southern Hemisphere seasons. Did you mean to put them in North Indian, or are they of storms hitting a southern hemisphere place, like Madagascar? Hurricanehink (talk) 21:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oy. I went to the wrong hemisphere! Thegreatdr 21:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, OK Hurricanehink (talk) 21:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is fixed. Thegreatdr 21:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganization in Atlantic hurricane reanalysis

Hi! I reorganized and reworded Atlantic hurricane reanalysis quite a bit. If I introduced any errors or anything of the sort, feel free to revert things. Thanks; happy editing. —AySz88\^-^ 22:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TC Climatology typo

Hello, Doc. While looking through Heather's HPC page, we saw that the text read:

On the graphic below is the storm total rainfall for Doreen, which used data from the National Climatic Data Center.

Just thought you may want to fix that little error... Titoxd^(?!?) 03:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fixed. Thegreatdr 18:29, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CHC rainfall images

Hi, I noticed you uploaded a CHC rainfall image and got reminded by OrphanBot. I'm not sure about this, but aren't CHC images protected by crown copyright? – Chacor 02:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know. I referenced the image appropriately, that I didn't know the copyright status and found it on the web. I was hoping the rainfall image would remain long enough for the rainfall image to be created by HPC. The source of the image is sending me the Juan information in the near future. Thegreatdr 10:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #5

The October issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Mid-latitude cyclone

Your recent edit to Mid-latitude cyclone (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 11:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can easily see how this one was good faith :) I have reverted the talk page myself. To rename a page, it is better to use the move link (next to history). It is also nessecary to try to form a consensus first, if one does not already exist. :) --Crimsone 11:44, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, DR, but cut-and-paste moves aren't allowed for various reasons, including the fact that it spoils the page history (per the GFDL, and no I don't mean the model). Therefore an admin has to do the technical page history move. – Chacor 11:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(per the GFDL, and no I don't mean the model). PML! Only on wiki could a comment like that be legitimately made!! :D --Crimsone 12:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extratropical cyclone

I've reverted your revert of the term "post tropical" in paragraph 1 of the article. As post-tropical is a valid and common term, and as the first paragraph is always a summary of what the article is about, it naturally shows that there is a post-tropical/extratropical transition element to the artlicle further down - the exact purpose of the opening statement. --Crimsone 13:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going into a revert war because you didn't read the reference. I posted something on your talk page about it. Reverting to unreferenced comments will keep this page a start article indefinitely. Thegreatdr 13:29, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erm - I've reverted ONCE! That's hardly a revert war! I'm not out to get you honest! I was actually being quite friendly.

As per your message on my talk - please see section 4 on this pdf link from ams.confex.com for the reference you asked for (particularly section 4(d)) as this shows that "Post-Tropical" cyclone is a legitimate term for the period after completion of extratropical transition. I'm only trying to help here. --Crimsone 13:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As per your message in your talk, the article is about (as per it's title). the lifecycle of tropical cyclones in the Atlantic. Section four splits the lifecycle into phases of extratropical transition, where section 4(d) is entitled "TE+24hr: Post-tropical", describing the situation after extratropical transition (ie, the birth of the resultant baroclinic low). --Crimsone 13:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extratropical cyclone - whole article

You've done some exceptional work to that article, and a barnstar will be forthcoming once I've had a coffee and performed certain human functions in the appropriate room. :p

That said, I would like to propose a suggestion (seeing that you are quite clearly an expert on the subject (of a sourt at the very least). To the best of my knowledge, Fronts (though not so much troughs) are a significant feature of these cyclones. As such, perhaps the article should have a section on them, briefly and roughly explaining the process of their forming and dissolving or dropping in baroclinic cyclones The section (like many other articles) would have the usual ("see frontal systems") under the section header, if such an article exists. What do you think? --Crimsone 14:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Thegreatdr 14:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'B' class is great! From stub, to start, to B in one day is really good going. As per your request for regrading, I've followed the advice given and requested a peer review. Please see the articles talk page (peer review tag at the top). --Crimsone 12:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extratropical cyclone overhaul

I had no access to the internet past couple days and couldn't follow the article. Anyway, the article is coming along very nicely. My only concern is "that (in the broader definition) is not a tropical cyclone or polar cyclone." point in the lead since the second sentence states this same thing in a more encyclopedic way. Anyway, good luck if your planning to take this article to fac. - Tutmosis 16:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I myself have much the same feeling - however, that contrib was recently made in response to a GA review - the comments about it are on the talk page. --Crimsone 17:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thegreatdr. I was wondering if you might re-check my adittions regarding interactions with other cyclones and anticyclones to the motion section of the article (packing it out by an extra three or four lines wouln't hurt presentation either if there's anything I've missed (as I undoubtedly have. lol).

Please also note the source I recently added (surrently listed as the first). Lot's of snippets of information in that lesson, in a very easy to understand form. I may have a shot at simplyfying the cyclogenesis section a little with that :) Crimsone 13:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cyclogenisis

I've just copyedited the section for flow, and "layman readability". Could you please take a look at the section to ensure that it still actually says the same thing as the previous version - thanks. Crimsone 16:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Peer review/Tropical cyclogenesis/archive1

Just FYI, you added a {{peerreview}} tag to Tropical cyclogenesis but didn't complete the nomination. I completed it, and you should add specifically what comments you'd like about the article, at Wikipedia:Peer review/Tropical cyclogenesis/archive1. Cheers, – Chacor 04:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Types of cyclone

You might have seen earlier that I created this sub-category of Meteorology. I've added all the types of cyclone and pages specifically notable as such to the category, but I don't know if there are many/any that I've missed. If you know of any, please feel free to add them :) --Crimsone 21:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1954 TD

Hey, you mentioned a little while back that you have a hard copy of Image:1954 sounding rocket image of a tropical cyclone.jpg. A few questions about it: Firstly, is it colored? That would be very nice. Secondly, can a commercial organization make a reasonable claim to copyright; it may not be a given that its free - I can advise if you aren't sure on that. I was wondering you could upload a high-res scan of the image (if its full color that would be very nice). Thanks.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclone windspeed climatology

Hey DR. Is there such a thing as tropical cyclone windspeed climatology? If there is, could you please help us write a short bit on it (mainly to counter the wholly amateur, original research-shod User:Storm05/Tropical Cyclone windspeed climatology)? If there isn't, that's good too, because when that poorly-written nonsense about it goes up it can be deleted as false. – Chacor 15:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Oh, and P.S., while looking for information about the 1994 Pacific typhoon season, I found some of the weekly TC reports you did for Dr. Jack Beven. :P – Chacor 15:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here for one, btw. :P Curious, do you or Dr. Beven have any information on 1994 storms tracked by the Philippines but not tracked by Guam or the JTWC? – Chacor 04:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Back then (12 years ago now), I don't seem to remember getting access to information from the Phillipines. I remember getting advisories from JTWC, JMA, Honolulu, and NHC. They (PAGASA) should have an archive on their website, I imagine. Thegreatdr 04:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I can't find one. :/ I emailed them over a week ago, but haven't received a reply. Thanks anyway. – Chacor 04:42, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Just so ya know, the precedent is that if an article is covered by the Tropical cyclones project we don't put the meteorology project template up there. Technically (the way I see it anyway), the TC project is a subproject of the meteorology project (regardless of the fact that it was made first and is much more active and further advanced), so having both templates is redundant. I have taken down the ones you added to TC articles. Don't hesitate to leave me a message if you disagree. -Runningonbrains 14:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as a side note, the flood wikiproject really isnt a wikiproject...I created the template with the hope that we could one day split the meteorology project into a dozen or so subprojects (actually wasn't my idea, but thought it was a good one), so people could concentrate more on their area of interest. Right now the amount of interest in the general meteorology project is limited so this isnt feasable. We are still debating as to whether or not to use the sub-project templates. -Runningonbrains 14:34, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meteorology project relation to Tropical Cyclones

The tropical cyclones project covers stuff related to tropical cyclones. Posting that template automatically means it is meteorological, so the Meteorology template is not necessary. CrazyC83 14:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then it should be listed like that on wikipedia, with the hurricane articles naturally being a subdirectory of meteorology. This is currently not the case when you browse through by topic. Thegreatdr

Eskimo words for snow

I don't think the article has anything to do with meteorology. It's about the the old urban legend and the way that language is used. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk)

I'll leave it for a couple of days to see if encourages anyone to work on it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 12:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

substituting out {{meteorology}}

I see you are substituting in the subproject templates. Are you doing these in any particular order? I'd like to help, but I want to make sure none slip through the cracks, and I don't want to disrupt however it is you're doing it. -Runningonbrains 16:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI II

Just so you know, when you added templates to Talk:Moon and Talk:Pluto, you also changed part of my signature ("MFEM" -> "MFEM") throughout the page. No harm done, as it was easily reverted, but you may wish to check and see if your edits are being scanned by a spell check (or some other form of proofreader) that might have made the changes. Thanks. --Ckatz^MFEM_spy 22:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's odd. Will have to look into that. Thegreatdr 01:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Happened again. --Ckatz^MFEM_spy 02:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclone

Thanks, I'll have a look at it later (after class ends... ;)) Titoxd^(?!?) 23:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page templates

Be sure to capitalize the words "Start" and "Stub", as well as High, Mid, Low and Top in talk page assessment templates. Otherwise they are read as unassessed. -Runningonbrains 11:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Didn't realize it was case sensitive. Thegreatdr 11:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amelia

High-importance would put Amelia in the same league as Camille, Andrew, Rita, Gilbert and Galveston 1900. Certainly not even close. Maybe Mid-importance but that is it. CrazyC83 01:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Allison hit a major city though and did $5 billion in damage...intensity doesn't alone do it, there are low-importance Category 4 and 5 hurricanes that made landfall with winds as strong as 150 mph... CrazyC83 01:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extratropical cyclone and cyclone

lol. No problem Thegreatdr. I don't really consider it reverting to be honest. I's more of a case of just trying to find the right way of saying it. It's not that I disagree with you at all ( Honestly don't - your summaries make good points), I'm just trying to improve the article in light of both the article itself, and it's ongoing FAC discussion. I didn't really revert, and nor did you - it was merely a case of attempting to improve the wording.

The latest version you've written is pretty good. I've just copyedited it for flow and clarity, and It's probably the best that statement has been with your edit.

The one thing that has eluded me though is a solid reference for the third paragraph of the warm seclusion section. I've been able to source the comment that says that they are more prevelant over the Ocean through references mentioning zero surface drag and the increased heat of the gulf stream allowing them to form. I can't find a source at all though for the statement mentioning the occurance all year round for the SH but not the NH. Would you happen to know of any? Crimsone 20:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not offhand. Could always do a web search. The problem is, due to fewer countries involved, it appears there has been less research in the southern hemisphere than the northern hemisphere. It could be POV on my part though. We may need to search in both spanish and english, considering South America. Thegreatdr 21:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #6

The November issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ACE and subtropical storms

Hey, do you know if ACE is calculated for subtropical storms? There's a discrepancy between our calculated ACE for 2002 and the data on the NOAA FAQ page. Our calculated number is 65.2, the NOAA page has 66. Gustav's time as a subtropical storm would increase our calculated number by 1.01, which is why I'm asking. --Coredesat 08:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cyclogenesis

Great job on the article. Just as a heads up, I nominated it for GA status. -Runningonbrains 00:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And you probably noticed, but Tropical cyclogenesis is now a GA. Congrats... you may want to have a look at this discussion as well. Titoxd^(?!?) 00:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to source it better then. Hopefully that can be done in the next couple weeks...there have been many work demands lately. Thegreatdr 22:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I see you've corrected the name on those sources in the article. I must coinfess, it never occured to me that "Droth" (as on the PDF properties) was actually yourself. Great stuff! lol Crimsone 17:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CPHC and subtrops

Hi DR,

I was looking through the talk page archives regarding 91C, where I found that you said "Cordesat, I made a query, and it appears you're incorrect concerning ST's and CPHC. I'll look up the NWS guidelines. It would have been odd if two warning centers within the NWS had differing strategies. This means there is a chance of inclusion, after the fact."

I was the one who first (perhaps incorrectly, as it stands?) said that the CPHC doesn't forecast subtrops. This was mainly due to their description on their page here - "Public advisories are issued for all Central Pacific tropical cyclones, Atlantic tropical or subtropical cyclones, and for eastern Pacific tropical or subtropical cyclones that are threatening land." It's weird how they did not include Central Pacific subtropical cyclones in that. Similarly for the forecast/advisory and discussion descriptions. – Chacor 09:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It could be that NHC is incorrect...but somehow I doubt that. CPHC consists of the Honolulu lead forecaster on shift at that time (a small TC warning center for sure with a potential staffing pool of about 5, close to 10 if you include their general forecasters.) It would be unusual for different, but strongly related, centers within the NWS to have different guidelines. As a whole, the NWS has been slowly moving towards more uniform guidelines with winter weather and has moved significantly towards similar guidelines considering QPF and medium range forecasts (day 3 and beyond.) The tropical program appears to be uniform between the remaining two centers within the NWS, the way I understand it. Thegreatdr 23:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello Dr David Roth nice work in meteorology. I too am very interested in the atmospheric patterns and conditions of our planet although my only related work on wikipedia is a hail canon which I started. It would be great if you could use your expertise to expand it a little. All the best in the US and keep up your specialized work on wikipedia. It needs experts such as yourself. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 22:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stormy weather

See what you mean - "New Year's 1963 storm in the US might have been better destination. jimfbleak 16:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that your winter storm article also doesn't specify that it's the US in the title, but I'm too unnerved to move it now!! jimfbleak 16:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Climate of Minnesota

Thanks for the edits to Climate of Minnesota. As a meteorologist how does the article look? Its up for GA right now. -Ravedave ^(help name my baby) 04:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:200611261345Zmetsat.gif needs a source

Hey there DR, just FYI you didn't specify a source for Image:200611261345Zmetsat.gif. Could you please add one? Thanks! – Chacor 10:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is, I grabbed it from our display system at work. Therefore, there is no web address source for it. Thegreatdr 11:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agh. I'm not sure what the appropriate thing to do in this case is. I suppose you could leave a note on the image's talk page or something... – Chacor 11:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, just say that: "Grabbed from HPC's display system, at Camp Springs, MD"... I think that would work. Either way, I'm watching the image now, so hopefully, there won't be any trouble. Titoxd^(?!?) 16:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Freda

Well, the main reason why I opposed such a switch (moving Columbus Day Storm to Typhoon Freda (1962)) was because the extratropical storm would be the only part of the article, basically. For the Atlantic storms with extratropical impact, they also (usually) had tropical impact and a good tropical storm history. Good job with the revision. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tennis expert RFC

I have opened a user conduct RFC against Tennis expert. Since you've had several run-ins with him in the past on Talk:Tropical cyclone, could you certify it? Thanks. --Coredesat 02:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I've withdrawn it. --Coredesat 03:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Storms in Question

I was strolling though the Weather Underground Website and ran into this. But yet it is not listed on the NRL. Storm05 14:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EPAC Retirement

I was wondering whether you had any insight on why Hurricanes Fico and Fefa were retired. Both had relatively minor effects, and there have been several other hurricanes which caused more damage or deaths that were not retired. Do you, by chance, have any knowledge on either of them? Hurricanehink (talk) 04:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to remember someone mentioning that Fico meant something nasty in Italian. Fefa, I have no idea. Thegreatdr

Interesting, thanks. Supposedly (I just checked), it means fig, which means something small or worthless (as in not give a damn/not give a fig). That makes sense, as the names are supposed to be good in all languages. I'll check Fefa later on. Hurricanehink (talk) 16:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TC observation

Well, yours is more interesting... mine is more of a "well, duh", almost, but the coral one is certainly something that should catch someone's eye... :) Titoxd^(?!?) 02:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we now know. ;) Good job. Titoxd^(?!?) 21:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input. Thegreatdr 23:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rainfall request

Do you have anything for rainfall in Baja California or any part of Mexico with Kristy of 2006? It would help with my article.Mitchazenia(8300+edits) 22:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mitchazenia, Kristy didn't affect land. – Chacor 00:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have a great day!

To quote WFO BMX from last Xmas Eve (courtesy of someone at Storm2k),

HAVE A EMOTIONALLY PLEASING NON-DENOMINATIONAL NON-SECULAR
GENDER NEUTRAL RACIALLY NEUTRAL LATE DECEMBER CELEBRATORY DAY...
(MERRY CHRISTMAS)

– Chacor 16:05, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You helped choose Jupiter as this week's WP:AID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Jupiter was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 14:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]