This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
sorry for bringing this up again, but I tried it (before it was quickly reverted) and it actually looks better. But some people are strange in that they just want this ugly "all pictures on the right" layout. [1] -- Revolución ( talk) 00:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree with NSLE I like then at the right.
How about in the middle? ;-) -- Holderca1 13:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I get the suspicion that the only way that you can satisfy everybody with the pictures is with a PowerPoint presentation file. B.Wind 08:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, three of the six strongest storms ever recorded in the Atlantic formed during the 2005 season: Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.
This sentence just stuck out at me as being terribly un-encyclopedic. It sounds like unnesesary comentary and although I agree with the point of the sentence, it could be worked in better.
Although Australian, I'm interested in weather phenomena over there in the Atlantic. However, I'm frustrated by the NHC website's apparent lack of synoptic charts. All the satellite images and forecast storm track maps are interesting, but to have a better understanding of the situation I'd really like to see a synoptic chart. The impression I get from searching US weather websites is that they don't seem to show these to the public in the US. The best I could find is here [2]. Is there any place that has good current synoptic charts of the Caribbean? (And in case it's not clear what I mean, a synoptic chart (for which I note there is no WP article) is a map with isobars on it.) - dmmaus 00:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
The NHC expects Alpha to form this afternoon. Who's gonna update the chart?
On this and other hurricane pages several editors have censored notable and citable material. It is against wiki rules to do so, and even more so to gather a group of editors together with the intent of enforcing such censorship. Stirling Newberry - Bopnews 03:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Consensus was not there because good faith was not made to obtain it. 05:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Listing article as totally disputed for censorship of notable and citable information, failure to achieve good faith consensus and agreement to vandalize page. Stirling Newberry - Bopnews 05:59, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
On the contrary, you just went and removed dispute tags, proving that you are censoring the article. There was no consensus, merely an agreement to gang revert the article. Stirling Newberry - Bopnews 06:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
My only complaint is that the aforementioned discussion is actually relevant to this page, yet was moved into a subdirectory with a title indicating illegitimacy (i.e. "speculation). I understand that a couple days ago someone was very annoyed at the length of the page due to "off-topic" stuff like betting pools. However the resulting editing of the discussion threads has left 2/3 of this page about ONE hurricane even though this is the discussion page for "2005 Atlantic hurricane season". PK9 06:32, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Ignore the troll. -- Golbez 07:24, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
This may have been asked before, but what happens if the Pacific runs out of names one year? Would they use the Greek Alphabet? If so, could that mean there would be two Hurricane Betas in one year? SargeAbernathy 20:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Has there ever been a recorded case of two tropical storms / hurricanes merging together? Tompw 23:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
We should have Beta in the list under Alpha as next available name. The greek letters are as much a part of the season as all the rest of the names. We had Wilma on the list when Arlene was active and it obviously hadn't formed yet. Also, the parapgraph above the list has said "The following names will be used..." for the entire season. There's no reason to change that to the past tense until the season is over, which won't happen for another month. And there's no reason to move this to /Speculation either. There's nothing speculatory about how an article should be formatted.-- WolFox 00:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
The horse is dead -- it's been beaten for far too long -- it's time to let it rest. The way the hurricane names are being presented now is sufficient. B.Wind 02:05, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
The 1992 Pacific hurricane season exhausted the entire list so 2005 isn't the first season in both places to do so. (This is User:Mike Halterman, logged in from another computer.) 131.247.50.4 04:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Just for reference, does anybody know what the most number of tropical depressions is for an Atlantic Hurricane Season? The great kawa 17:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
That's always the asterisk.I can just see things in Hurricane Heaven (where the storms go where they die...where every cloud is a thundercloud,whirling around at unearthly speeds in lightning and rainstorms that never dissipate) where old-timers like Labor Day and Dog and Great 1780 complain that the youngsters who got measured by dropsondes and pictured by satellites get all the respect...but who knows what prehistoric monsters outstripped them all?--Louis E./le@put.com/ 12.144.5.2 06:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
After the season,the coverage of the predictions will need to be rewritten in terms of how accurate they were (which in just about all cases is how much of an underestimate they were).But honestly...if Dr. Gray or someone else had gotten up in May and said,
Would anyone have taken him seriously?--Louis E./le@put.com/ 12.144.5.2 03:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to put in a current radar image of the entire Atlantic at the top of the article?-- WolFox 05:31, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I made a new template {{ hurricane season links}} and used it in this article (only). I didn't know whether to include 5 or 7 seasons in the list (the discussion at {{ infobox hurricane season}} indicated 5 was preferred, but I noticed this article uses 7). So...which should it be? And, can this template be improved? Since there are well over 100 season articles, using a template for this list is very wise...and although most seasons already have the lists (varying between 5 and 7 seasons in each), the list is supposed to go inside the infobox so they'll all have to be updated eventually. Jdorje 08:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I believe several of the storm sections are too long, and should be whittled down to a smaller summary or moved into their own article.
Jdorje 19:18, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I tried my best to condense the articles. Only important information in my opinion stayed. Hurricanehink 01:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I added that the 1983 Pacific hurricane season exhausted its list. That is true. There was a Hurricane Winnie (which formed in December!). There were no X, Y, or Z names that year, so the list was exhausted. Please do not remove that note. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 19:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
sorry for bringing this up again, but I tried it (before it was quickly reverted) and it actually looks better. But some people are strange in that they just want this ugly "all pictures on the right" layout. [1] -- Revolución ( talk) 00:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree with NSLE I like then at the right.
How about in the middle? ;-) -- Holderca1 13:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I get the suspicion that the only way that you can satisfy everybody with the pictures is with a PowerPoint presentation file. B.Wind 08:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, three of the six strongest storms ever recorded in the Atlantic formed during the 2005 season: Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.
This sentence just stuck out at me as being terribly un-encyclopedic. It sounds like unnesesary comentary and although I agree with the point of the sentence, it could be worked in better.
Although Australian, I'm interested in weather phenomena over there in the Atlantic. However, I'm frustrated by the NHC website's apparent lack of synoptic charts. All the satellite images and forecast storm track maps are interesting, but to have a better understanding of the situation I'd really like to see a synoptic chart. The impression I get from searching US weather websites is that they don't seem to show these to the public in the US. The best I could find is here [2]. Is there any place that has good current synoptic charts of the Caribbean? (And in case it's not clear what I mean, a synoptic chart (for which I note there is no WP article) is a map with isobars on it.) - dmmaus 00:58, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
The NHC expects Alpha to form this afternoon. Who's gonna update the chart?
On this and other hurricane pages several editors have censored notable and citable material. It is against wiki rules to do so, and even more so to gather a group of editors together with the intent of enforcing such censorship. Stirling Newberry - Bopnews 03:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Consensus was not there because good faith was not made to obtain it. 05:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Listing article as totally disputed for censorship of notable and citable information, failure to achieve good faith consensus and agreement to vandalize page. Stirling Newberry - Bopnews 05:59, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
On the contrary, you just went and removed dispute tags, proving that you are censoring the article. There was no consensus, merely an agreement to gang revert the article. Stirling Newberry - Bopnews 06:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
My only complaint is that the aforementioned discussion is actually relevant to this page, yet was moved into a subdirectory with a title indicating illegitimacy (i.e. "speculation). I understand that a couple days ago someone was very annoyed at the length of the page due to "off-topic" stuff like betting pools. However the resulting editing of the discussion threads has left 2/3 of this page about ONE hurricane even though this is the discussion page for "2005 Atlantic hurricane season". PK9 06:32, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Ignore the troll. -- Golbez 07:24, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
This may have been asked before, but what happens if the Pacific runs out of names one year? Would they use the Greek Alphabet? If so, could that mean there would be two Hurricane Betas in one year? SargeAbernathy 20:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Has there ever been a recorded case of two tropical storms / hurricanes merging together? Tompw 23:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
We should have Beta in the list under Alpha as next available name. The greek letters are as much a part of the season as all the rest of the names. We had Wilma on the list when Arlene was active and it obviously hadn't formed yet. Also, the parapgraph above the list has said "The following names will be used..." for the entire season. There's no reason to change that to the past tense until the season is over, which won't happen for another month. And there's no reason to move this to /Speculation either. There's nothing speculatory about how an article should be formatted.-- WolFox 00:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
The horse is dead -- it's been beaten for far too long -- it's time to let it rest. The way the hurricane names are being presented now is sufficient. B.Wind 02:05, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
The 1992 Pacific hurricane season exhausted the entire list so 2005 isn't the first season in both places to do so. (This is User:Mike Halterman, logged in from another computer.) 131.247.50.4 04:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Just for reference, does anybody know what the most number of tropical depressions is for an Atlantic Hurricane Season? The great kawa 17:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
That's always the asterisk.I can just see things in Hurricane Heaven (where the storms go where they die...where every cloud is a thundercloud,whirling around at unearthly speeds in lightning and rainstorms that never dissipate) where old-timers like Labor Day and Dog and Great 1780 complain that the youngsters who got measured by dropsondes and pictured by satellites get all the respect...but who knows what prehistoric monsters outstripped them all?--Louis E./le@put.com/ 12.144.5.2 06:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
After the season,the coverage of the predictions will need to be rewritten in terms of how accurate they were (which in just about all cases is how much of an underestimate they were).But honestly...if Dr. Gray or someone else had gotten up in May and said,
Would anyone have taken him seriously?--Louis E./le@put.com/ 12.144.5.2 03:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to put in a current radar image of the entire Atlantic at the top of the article?-- WolFox 05:31, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I made a new template {{ hurricane season links}} and used it in this article (only). I didn't know whether to include 5 or 7 seasons in the list (the discussion at {{ infobox hurricane season}} indicated 5 was preferred, but I noticed this article uses 7). So...which should it be? And, can this template be improved? Since there are well over 100 season articles, using a template for this list is very wise...and although most seasons already have the lists (varying between 5 and 7 seasons in each), the list is supposed to go inside the infobox so they'll all have to be updated eventually. Jdorje 08:00, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I believe several of the storm sections are too long, and should be whittled down to a smaller summary or moved into their own article.
Jdorje 19:18, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I tried my best to condense the articles. Only important information in my opinion stayed. Hurricanehink 01:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I added that the 1983 Pacific hurricane season exhausted its list. That is true. There was a Hurricane Winnie (which formed in December!). There were no X, Y, or Z names that year, so the list was exhausted. Please do not remove that note. Miss Michelle | Talk to Michelle 19:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)