This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2018–19 Australian region cyclone season article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other basin talkpages | 2018:
Atlantic -
W. Pacific -
Central and East Pacific -
N. Indian -
S. Hemisphere
2018-19: S. Hemisphere - SW. Indian - Australian - S. Pacific 2019: Atlantic - W. Pacific - Central and East. Pacific - N. Indian - S. Hemisphere |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Darwin TWO
Brisbane Cyclone Advice
Perth TWO
Perth TWO
ID | Date (ACST) | TC Name | Original Basin | Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
01U | 2018-09-25 | *Liua | Coral Sea | |
02U | 2018-11-09 | *Bouchra | Indian Ocean | |
04U | 2018-12-01 | Owen | Coral Sea | BT Database |
05U | 2018-12-14 | Kenanga | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
07U | 2019-01-01 | Penny | Northern Queensland | BT Database |
11U | 2019-01-11 | -- | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
12U | 2019-01-19 | Riley | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
13U | 2019-01-23 | -- | Northern Queensland | PTCR |
14U | 2019-02-11 | Oma | Coral Sea | BT Database |
15U | 2019-03-07 | -- | Indian Ocean | |
17U | 2019-03-07 | Savannah | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
19U | 2019-03-14 | Veronica | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
20U | 2019-03-17 | Trevor | Coral Sea | BT Database |
21U | 2019-04-03 | Wallace | Arafura Sea | BT Database |
22U | 2019-04-05 | -- | Arafura Sea | |
23U | 2019-04-21 | -- | Indian Ocean | |
24U | 2019-04-27 | *Lorna | Indian Ocean | |
25U | 2019-05-04 | Lili | Indonesia | |
26U | 2019-05-09 | Ann | Coral Sea |
Cyclone Owen has lasted a long time, as well as taken an odd track. Should it get an article? Alex of Canada ( talk) 21:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
I support it — it was one of the longest lived tropical cyclones in the AU Region. EBGamingWiki ( talk) 19:08, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
I do not understand how some editors can get the designations without any proof. They should be all removed within 24 hours unless there are solid evidences.-- 🱠💬 07:23, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Sometimes they are given in the Cyclone outlook. Example: The Mar 13- Currently active (16/3) Tropical low is 19U. AAnnoonnyymous ( talk) 13:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Proof: http://web.archive.org/web/20190316133210/http://www.bom.gov.au/wa/forecasts/nwcyclone.shtml AAnnoonnyymous ( talk) 13:33, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Is Savannah the one which developed southeast from Java last week? I ask this because it is not there in its map. If it is, it brought above average rainfall and caused some floods that killed a child on a road accident in the flooded Solo–Kertosono Toll Road near Madiun. Is this can be listed as fatality? Ref: "Seorang Bocah Tewas dalam Kecelakaan Mobil di Tol Madiun yang Banjir" (in Indonesian). Kompas.com. 2019-03-07. Retrieved 2019-03-15. RXerself ( talk) 07:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
I have created an archive for Veronica's warnings. Noah Talk 21:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I have created an archive for Trevor's warnings. Noah Talk 21:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
TCFA TCFA TCFA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
I noticed that the port in Pilbara coast was closed due to Veronica, the iron can't be exported. We were not sure if this damage is related to Veronica or not. These two: [1] [2] showed that Veronica is related to the damage, while this just indicated the damage, seems no relation to Veronica. Pinging @ Hurricane Noah and ChocolateTrain: for this. -- B dash ( talk) 13:14, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved per WP:SNOW ( closed by non-admin page mover). B dash ( talk) 06:36, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
2018–19 Australian region cyclone season →
2018–2019 Australian region cyclone season – Per
WP:DATERANGE -
FlightTime (
open channel) 16:04, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I double checked with the BoM about Lorna who responded by telling me:
One of our experienced TC analysts had a close look at the microwave imagery and decided (like Reunion) that the centre stayed *just* west of 90E. So, like those "other editors" we plan to be pedantic and not include it in the numbers for the season or keep a record in our database. It's interesting to compare Lorna with Kenanga. Kenanga was in the Australian region for <6 hours; but since it was in the region at one stage, and even though operationally we reached agreement that Reunion would take it straight over from Indonesia (ie. we didn't issue any warnings for it), we will count Kenanga in the Australian region stats and we'll put Reunion's best track in our database. So we will have 9 TCs so far this season with a low-mod chance of another next week.
As a result, I formally propose that we remove Lorna from the stats and chuck it into the other systems. Jason Rees ( talk) 16:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Jason Rees: Then how should we deal with the write-up for Lorna's section in the South-West Indian Ocean basin article? The section currently states that Lorna exited the basin twice into the Australian region basin, which runs counter to the information that has been presented here. It looks like a rewrite might be in order, but I don't know exactly how this should be done. LightandDark2000 🌀 ( talk) 20:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Jason Rees: This source states that Extc Lorna was in 93E as of 1/5. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
This appears to be a storm that is not worthy of an article. It has no damages or deaths and lacks significant impacts. This honestly should not have an article. Merge Noah Talk 01:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge This storm is not that notable and impactful enough to deserve an article. In other words, this system did completely nothing to land which is why this doesn't need an article. Sandy 141 56 :) 02:07, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge I agree. There weren't any interesting things about the storm and barely any impacts on land, if not none. Why would anyone make an article about this storm in the first place? Brandontracker ( talk) 03:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Keep I fundamentally disagree. The system was not just any old cyclone. It was a severe tropical cyclone which brought strong winds to several land areas, including gale-force in one instance, and produced very heavy rainfall in the far-northern Northern Territory. The system also hampered the efforts of shipping operators in getting ports back up and running following Veronica. It generated public interest within Australia due to its proximity to land in the Kimberley region, and due to fears that a repeat of Cyclone Veronica's devastation could have been brewing. This is evidenced by the following articles—just some of the sources which I could find: 1 2 3. Merging this article would be a negative outcome. A significant amount of information would be lost. The existence of this article is not a detriment to the WikiProject, it is not a detriment to Wikipedia, and it is not a detriment to publicly available knowledge. The existence of Wikipedia's notability guidelines are to prevent stub articles from being written due to a lack of information on the system. The article is well-written, well-structured; well-formatted; well-researched; free of grammatical errors, spelling errors and punctuation errors; effectively incorporates hyperlinks to useful Wikipedia pages; and is neutral in its point of view and coverage of topics. It is a genuinely useful, factual, interesting encyclopedic article which is the very best easily accessible detailed overview of the topic anywhere. There are zero benefits whatsoever to any person or any organization that could possibly result from deleting the article. It contains no damaging material, personal attacks, misleading content, factually inaccurate statements, poor prose, or anything at all which could conceivably act to harm anyone or anything whatsoever, and as such, there is no reasonably justifiable cause for deleting it. ChocolateTrain ( talk) 09:22, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge per Noah. @ ChocolateTrain: really, a lot of your writing in that article's meteorological history section is needlessly verbose and detailed. Concision is important for readers.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 09:38, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment I know it was thought to be a second Veronica, but it wasn't. It actually was just a regular old storm. I agree with Jasper Deng that the Meteorological history was highly verbose and mostly unnecessary. If you cut out the unnecessary parts of the article, the article will be very small. Brandontracker ( talk) 19:20, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Strong Merge This storm is highly unnoticeable since it does not impact land that much and there's nothing that makes it stick out at all. INeed Support :3 19:29, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge – Wallace was a system that caused little impact, and what impact info does exist can be added to the season page. Like others have said, please don't take this merge discussion personally. All of us editors have had our past works merged or deleted before. And while this article doesn't meet notability standards, it's very well written and sourced. We can definitely use your skills for more notable cyclones especially here in the southern hemisphere! TropicalAnalystwx13 ( talk · contributions) 00:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge — Not really a noticeable storm at all, only 75 mph for 6 hrs. I’d say Veronica needs a main article more than Wallace, as it’s intensification phase was remarkable, similar to Ernie — which has its own article. EBGamingWiki ( talk) 18:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment I agree with EBGamingWiki about Veronica having a main article. The only thing about it is that the article could turn out like Wallace's one. Brandontracker ( talk) 20:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment Someone, just merge the article. A lot of people agreed to merge the article against the creator of the article himself. Brandontracker ( talk) 20:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment @ ChocolateTrain: Who cares that it caused severe rainfall in the Northern Territory? People will care if it actually made landfall, but even that people don't really care. Brandontracker ( talk) 20:43, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate the work, but Ann just had minor impact on land, no deaths and major damage occurred. Thus the article should be merged. The original work can move back to userspace. -- 219.78.190.16 ( talk) 12:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Does this incident related to Savannah? Cos the section just said the cyclone affected Java only. -- 182.239.117.154 ( talk) 09:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that an IP had started a merge in May. But that one may be WP:TOOSOON to decide. Almost half a year later, still there is no significant impact of the cyclone in Australia. Those winds and rainfall can be written in the season's section. I'm here to propose a second merge of Cyclone Ann. -- A1Cafel ( talk) 07:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
I am here to propose a third merger for Ann since it never caused any impact in Australia. I strongly request you reply with an opinion because I won't conclude this section. 2602:306:8BB9:4E20:45BD:3B7F:A705:DCD0 ( talk) 03:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
1:) The article is not only well-sourced, but focused on the main parts too;
and:
2:) For considering the editors' feelings when the article becomes merged. I mean, will the sources be in the infobox? A well-sourced article with many words should take for consideration.
Hope you understand my decision. Respectfully yours, 👦 09:57, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2018–19 Australian region cyclone season article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other basin talkpages | 2018:
Atlantic -
W. Pacific -
Central and East Pacific -
N. Indian -
S. Hemisphere
2018-19: S. Hemisphere - SW. Indian - Australian - S. Pacific 2019: Atlantic - W. Pacific - Central and East. Pacific - N. Indian - S. Hemisphere |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Darwin TWO
Brisbane Cyclone Advice
Perth TWO
Perth TWO
ID | Date (ACST) | TC Name | Original Basin | Source |
---|---|---|---|---|
01U | 2018-09-25 | *Liua | Coral Sea | |
02U | 2018-11-09 | *Bouchra | Indian Ocean | |
04U | 2018-12-01 | Owen | Coral Sea | BT Database |
05U | 2018-12-14 | Kenanga | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
07U | 2019-01-01 | Penny | Northern Queensland | BT Database |
11U | 2019-01-11 | -- | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
12U | 2019-01-19 | Riley | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
13U | 2019-01-23 | -- | Northern Queensland | PTCR |
14U | 2019-02-11 | Oma | Coral Sea | BT Database |
15U | 2019-03-07 | -- | Indian Ocean | |
17U | 2019-03-07 | Savannah | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
19U | 2019-03-14 | Veronica | Indian Ocean | BT Database |
20U | 2019-03-17 | Trevor | Coral Sea | BT Database |
21U | 2019-04-03 | Wallace | Arafura Sea | BT Database |
22U | 2019-04-05 | -- | Arafura Sea | |
23U | 2019-04-21 | -- | Indian Ocean | |
24U | 2019-04-27 | *Lorna | Indian Ocean | |
25U | 2019-05-04 | Lili | Indonesia | |
26U | 2019-05-09 | Ann | Coral Sea |
Cyclone Owen has lasted a long time, as well as taken an odd track. Should it get an article? Alex of Canada ( talk) 21:10, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
I support it — it was one of the longest lived tropical cyclones in the AU Region. EBGamingWiki ( talk) 19:08, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
I do not understand how some editors can get the designations without any proof. They should be all removed within 24 hours unless there are solid evidences.-- 🱠💬 07:23, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Sometimes they are given in the Cyclone outlook. Example: The Mar 13- Currently active (16/3) Tropical low is 19U. AAnnoonnyymous ( talk) 13:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Proof: http://web.archive.org/web/20190316133210/http://www.bom.gov.au/wa/forecasts/nwcyclone.shtml AAnnoonnyymous ( talk) 13:33, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Is Savannah the one which developed southeast from Java last week? I ask this because it is not there in its map. If it is, it brought above average rainfall and caused some floods that killed a child on a road accident in the flooded Solo–Kertosono Toll Road near Madiun. Is this can be listed as fatality? Ref: "Seorang Bocah Tewas dalam Kecelakaan Mobil di Tol Madiun yang Banjir" (in Indonesian). Kompas.com. 2019-03-07. Retrieved 2019-03-15. RXerself ( talk) 07:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
I have created an archive for Veronica's warnings. Noah Talk 21:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
I have created an archive for Trevor's warnings. Noah Talk 21:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
TCFA TCFA TCFA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
I noticed that the port in Pilbara coast was closed due to Veronica, the iron can't be exported. We were not sure if this damage is related to Veronica or not. These two: [1] [2] showed that Veronica is related to the damage, while this just indicated the damage, seems no relation to Veronica. Pinging @ Hurricane Noah and ChocolateTrain: for this. -- B dash ( talk) 13:14, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved per WP:SNOW ( closed by non-admin page mover). B dash ( talk) 06:36, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
2018–19 Australian region cyclone season →
2018–2019 Australian region cyclone season – Per
WP:DATERANGE -
FlightTime (
open channel) 16:04, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
I double checked with the BoM about Lorna who responded by telling me:
One of our experienced TC analysts had a close look at the microwave imagery and decided (like Reunion) that the centre stayed *just* west of 90E. So, like those "other editors" we plan to be pedantic and not include it in the numbers for the season or keep a record in our database. It's interesting to compare Lorna with Kenanga. Kenanga was in the Australian region for <6 hours; but since it was in the region at one stage, and even though operationally we reached agreement that Reunion would take it straight over from Indonesia (ie. we didn't issue any warnings for it), we will count Kenanga in the Australian region stats and we'll put Reunion's best track in our database. So we will have 9 TCs so far this season with a low-mod chance of another next week.
As a result, I formally propose that we remove Lorna from the stats and chuck it into the other systems. Jason Rees ( talk) 16:06, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Jason Rees: Then how should we deal with the write-up for Lorna's section in the South-West Indian Ocean basin article? The section currently states that Lorna exited the basin twice into the Australian region basin, which runs counter to the information that has been presented here. It looks like a rewrite might be in order, but I don't know exactly how this should be done. LightandDark2000 🌀 ( talk) 20:38, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Jason Rees: This source states that Extc Lorna was in 93E as of 1/5. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:13, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
This appears to be a storm that is not worthy of an article. It has no damages or deaths and lacks significant impacts. This honestly should not have an article. Merge Noah Talk 01:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge This storm is not that notable and impactful enough to deserve an article. In other words, this system did completely nothing to land which is why this doesn't need an article. Sandy 141 56 :) 02:07, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge I agree. There weren't any interesting things about the storm and barely any impacts on land, if not none. Why would anyone make an article about this storm in the first place? Brandontracker ( talk) 03:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Keep I fundamentally disagree. The system was not just any old cyclone. It was a severe tropical cyclone which brought strong winds to several land areas, including gale-force in one instance, and produced very heavy rainfall in the far-northern Northern Territory. The system also hampered the efforts of shipping operators in getting ports back up and running following Veronica. It generated public interest within Australia due to its proximity to land in the Kimberley region, and due to fears that a repeat of Cyclone Veronica's devastation could have been brewing. This is evidenced by the following articles—just some of the sources which I could find: 1 2 3. Merging this article would be a negative outcome. A significant amount of information would be lost. The existence of this article is not a detriment to the WikiProject, it is not a detriment to Wikipedia, and it is not a detriment to publicly available knowledge. The existence of Wikipedia's notability guidelines are to prevent stub articles from being written due to a lack of information on the system. The article is well-written, well-structured; well-formatted; well-researched; free of grammatical errors, spelling errors and punctuation errors; effectively incorporates hyperlinks to useful Wikipedia pages; and is neutral in its point of view and coverage of topics. It is a genuinely useful, factual, interesting encyclopedic article which is the very best easily accessible detailed overview of the topic anywhere. There are zero benefits whatsoever to any person or any organization that could possibly result from deleting the article. It contains no damaging material, personal attacks, misleading content, factually inaccurate statements, poor prose, or anything at all which could conceivably act to harm anyone or anything whatsoever, and as such, there is no reasonably justifiable cause for deleting it. ChocolateTrain ( talk) 09:22, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge per Noah. @ ChocolateTrain: really, a lot of your writing in that article's meteorological history section is needlessly verbose and detailed. Concision is important for readers.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 09:38, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment I know it was thought to be a second Veronica, but it wasn't. It actually was just a regular old storm. I agree with Jasper Deng that the Meteorological history was highly verbose and mostly unnecessary. If you cut out the unnecessary parts of the article, the article will be very small. Brandontracker ( talk) 19:20, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Strong Merge This storm is highly unnoticeable since it does not impact land that much and there's nothing that makes it stick out at all. INeed Support :3 19:29, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge – Wallace was a system that caused little impact, and what impact info does exist can be added to the season page. Like others have said, please don't take this merge discussion personally. All of us editors have had our past works merged or deleted before. And while this article doesn't meet notability standards, it's very well written and sourced. We can definitely use your skills for more notable cyclones especially here in the southern hemisphere! TropicalAnalystwx13 ( talk · contributions) 00:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Merge — Not really a noticeable storm at all, only 75 mph for 6 hrs. I’d say Veronica needs a main article more than Wallace, as it’s intensification phase was remarkable, similar to Ernie — which has its own article. EBGamingWiki ( talk) 18:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment I agree with EBGamingWiki about Veronica having a main article. The only thing about it is that the article could turn out like Wallace's one. Brandontracker ( talk) 20:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment Someone, just merge the article. A lot of people agreed to merge the article against the creator of the article himself. Brandontracker ( talk) 20:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment @ ChocolateTrain: Who cares that it caused severe rainfall in the Northern Territory? People will care if it actually made landfall, but even that people don't really care. Brandontracker ( talk) 20:43, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate the work, but Ann just had minor impact on land, no deaths and major damage occurred. Thus the article should be merged. The original work can move back to userspace. -- 219.78.190.16 ( talk) 12:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Does this incident related to Savannah? Cos the section just said the cyclone affected Java only. -- 182.239.117.154 ( talk) 09:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that an IP had started a merge in May. But that one may be WP:TOOSOON to decide. Almost half a year later, still there is no significant impact of the cyclone in Australia. Those winds and rainfall can be written in the season's section. I'm here to propose a second merge of Cyclone Ann. -- A1Cafel ( talk) 07:09, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
I am here to propose a third merger for Ann since it never caused any impact in Australia. I strongly request you reply with an opinion because I won't conclude this section. 2602:306:8BB9:4E20:45BD:3B7F:A705:DCD0 ( talk) 03:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
1:) The article is not only well-sourced, but focused on the main parts too;
and:
2:) For considering the editors' feelings when the article becomes merged. I mean, will the sources be in the infobox? A well-sourced article with many words should take for consideration.
Hope you understand my decision. Respectfully yours, 👦 09:57, 16 November 2019 (UTC)