This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I see that the article is at Kyrill (storm), to which Kyrill redirects. But wouldn't it be better to swap the two around: the article at Kyrill with Kyrill (storm) as a redirect? A ecis Bravado 21:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
This was the same system as the North American ice storm of 2007. Since it is the standards of the WikiProject to keep the same system on one article, should this be merged? (Although this is a very good article as it is) CrazyC83 23:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
My problem with this article name applies to all named European windstorms so I've raised the issue on WikiProject Meteorology. To summarize that in the context of this article:
This also makes a merger with the North American Ice storm feasible; as it can be put at a descriptive article title - with this page as a redirect.-- Nilf anion ( talk) 00:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The Quebec news network LCN (Francophone source only) is also using the name Cyril for the storm, [1] JForget 04:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC) Name Kyrill is used in the Czech Republic too. [2] Monika_46
The name Kyrill was also mentioned in a BBC news report, but either way, it is an unofficial, German name. A more generic, descriptive title for the article should probably be chosen. But which one? European windstorm of January 2007 is ambiguous because there already was a severe storm that affected Sweden and Norway (named Per (storm) by the Norwegian meteorological office). Oghmoir 09:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
"Kyrill" is also used in Austria and Switzerland. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
... as well as in France: fr:Kyrill_(tempête) and Le calme revient après la tempête Kyrill. It is an official name. -- 213.155.224.232 10:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
As this argument applies for all European windstorms, they should either all be labelled, or the tag removed frone this one. I'm removing it for now, as the right place to discuss a mass-renaming is at the Meteorology WikiProject mentioned above. Carcharoth 10:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) Umm, I object to all of these names. Not ONE of them is commonly known by these name outside of Germany, unlike Hurricane Ernesto (2006) which was known by that name globally. Yes sources outside Germany will pick them up, but for every news article you can find in the US referring to Kyrill by the name, you will find 100 that refer to it but don't use the name. The January 18 name has precedent, these storms are typically referred to by the day of impact in the UK (cf the Burns' Day storm); it isn't ambiguous really. Besides Lothar (storm) is very bad stylistically (not least as Lothar is used regularly).-- Nilf anion ( talk) 12:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
As well, if the name is kept I would suggest the title convention be European Windstorm Kyrill, to be in line with Tropical Storm Alpha, Hurricane Katrina, etc. Radagast 20:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Ehem... under no circumstance WP makes the name, it uses names other made. -- 213.155.224.232 23:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Re The Burns' Day storm. No need for a year at all in the title, it is simply referred to by everyone in the UK as the "Burns' Day Storm." The lowest pressure on this article is a little suspect by the way. I recorded a low of 986hPa myself. The lowest I saw this analysed by the Met Office was 962hPa. I can't see this storm getting a name in the UK, the one on the 30th October 2000 was pretty bad and didn't.
Where has this term "European Windstorm" come from by the way? The only time I've ever come across it in the UK is with the insurance industry rather than the meteorological community. P.K. 23:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe there is some precedent for the current name, per Erwin (storm), Lothar (storm) and Per (storm), but I would prefer a rename to European Windstorm Kyrill. The common naming pattern in similar categories seems to be <type of weather event> <name associated with the event>. A ecis Bravado 11:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I've put up requests for comments at WP:NC and WP:RFC. The way I currently see the discussion, this is a bit of a borderline case, as there's differing opinions between editors who want to use the de facto name and editors who want to use the WP:METEO convention. Given that WP:NC says "use common English name where available, and it has been said that there is no "common" English name for this storm, further input from experienced editors might be helpful. -- doco (☏) 15:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
There is no name for this storm in the UK so Kyrill even if it is only used in germany is the closest there is to a common name. Geni 15:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
While discussing the usage of the storm name in English speaking countries remember that some adopted the name to the English version "Cyril" (eg Australia, Ireland, U.K., India. -- 88.76.207.132 18:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Here's the historic description why and how hows and highs are named by the Deutsche Wetterdienst [6]: This practice has been well established for over 50 years and maintaining it is requested not only by the German Weather Service or by the commercial service providers but also, by the public. Apart from the US-Weather Service, the Institute of Meteorology is the only source for named vortices worldwide. -- 213.155.224.232 18:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Please calm down, people, and keep a cool head. It seems that the storm/extratropical cyclone/European windstorm is wreaking as much havoc on this talk page as in the real world. Noone will be hurt if the discussion lasts a day longer and the article remains here a day longer. And noone will be hurt if the article is moved to another name. Remember that you're arguing over a bunch of pixels. A ecis Bravado 18:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey folks, yeah, I'm joining in with this plea. Let's try and remain considerate, no need in getting ironic over any of this... such a disruptive event has already caused lots of distress, and some if not many of us editors may still worry about those we care for, and regard for the readers goes without saying. Let's stay cool. Thanks! and cheers - Introvert • ~ 21:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
34 in infobox, 35 in the article and 33 in Wikinews. Which is the true number of casualties? Deliogul 12:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I have added the two confirmed Belgian casualties to the list by country. The total in the header still reads 36- but the list adds up to 40. Should I change this?
There are two different values of maximum wind speed on the top of Snieżka presented, 212 and 216 km/h, NEEDS CHECKING. Moreover someone wrote that 216km/h is the highest speed ever recorded there - NOT TRUE - the highest wind speeds are: 228km/h (average), 288km/h (gusts), Polish speaking users can check it out at http://pogpol.chilan.com/rekordy.htm -- Domikot 13:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Here is a PD NOAA image of the storm system over the North Sea. Consider working it into the article. Edit as needed. Hope this is helpful. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 14:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know where this citation has gone? Sorry, but as I was organising the categories I noticed that Note 11 doesn't have anything other then two statements are using it as a citation.-- S kully Collins Edits 16:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Why are all the countries in bold in the latter sections of this article? Manderiko 16:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest that the article needs to be tidied up as follows. a. introduction b overview of meteorological situation and history of the storm c. split effects into different countries rather than different sectors. d. extremes across different areas affected. Yorkshiresky 18:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Can someone add that 1.7 million litres of oil were leaked in the Rotterdam Harbor? I don't really know how to write it and it got caused by Kyrill. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Camou ( talk • contribs) 23:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC).
There is no reason whatever to mention one victim specifically because of his job, while keeping all others anonymous. It is ok, to link the news as a reference, as well as linking from the wikipage of the manager (if any) to the storm and mentioning he died there. But he should not be treated as anything special in a list of statistics - as you know, all man should be treated equal and none more equal than the others.
Tp1024 23:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The 'original was first called Europe's January Storms, yet people disregarded this page and somewhat subsequently renamed it and deleted my history. Ok it was a long name but...Is this fair?. I firstly think it as done because I am seen as stupid because I am a High School student, but surely age doesn't matter. For what would the world and information be like around our world if it was not for people who are younger than 18! Brylcreem2 -- Brylcreem2 12:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
This article has been vandalised by 132.73.80.97, 15:40, 19 January 2007, changing the lowest pressure from < 964.8 hPa to ridiculous < 998.5 hPa. This has been corrected now. -- 88.76.207.132 10:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
The article appears to be a bit German-centric, even though almost the whole of Europe was affected. Can't we make it a bit more neutral? -- 81.152.178.228 12:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm not too thrilled about the first sentence of the article. It currently reads "Kyrill ... is the name given to a low pressure area that evolved into a violent European windstorm, ..." The part about "the name given to" is unnecessary: if the article says that "Kyrill is a low-pressure area etc.", then it's obvious that Kyrill is the name that was given to that low pressure area etc. Removing the words doesn't change anything, but it does improve the readability of the sentence. A ecis Bravado 15:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Well yeah. Section header says it all. Four pictures of basically the same thing is a bit.. boring. And the pictures are of a low quality. I suggest deleting some/all of them? -- Mystman666 ( Talk) 22:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
...erm, cleaning up the article. I have moved lots of text around and tried to sort evreything under an appropriate header. Would suggest to continue that way, otherwise the article will become an unreadable mess.
Things still read a little German-centric; in particular, there is very little about effects in Eastern Europe. Would suggest to check with Wikipedians from that region, if any are interested (note: the Dutch and Polish articles seem to be rather informative - anybody for translations?).
What's lacking: info on major damages to buildings etc., as well as reports from insurances on the extent of damage.
And if there is some comprehensive report by a national weather service, I'd strongly suggest to integrate it to get the meteorological facts right. Keep eyes open please. Kosebamse 07:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
The ski jumping event in Zakopane yesterday was overshadowed by massive storm-like winds, that got Czech ski jumper Jan Mazoch severely injured, in critical condition. Was this Kyrill as well, or was it unrelated? If it was Kyrill, should it be added to the article? A ecis Bravado 17:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
At some point we will destroy the climate so much that we will destroy ourselves. I really wish we loved our grandchildren more. Is there any other relative article that deals with the damage that we have done to our planet? StevenAR 00:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Damage costs are currently listed as "at least 1Bn Euro". BBC News say that "Swiss Re estimated that the cost of the damage winter storm Kyrill caused across Europe could be as high as £2.3bn ($4.5bn; 3.5bn euros)."
We know that Kyrill started of the 15th of Janurary, 2007. But, when did this strom end, and where? -- Tayuke 02:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I've added a template requesting an update to the section Kyrill (storm)#France. It currently says: "A woman in Lille is missing after the roof of a store collapsed." Is she still missing, after four months? A ecis Brievenbus 23:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Kyrill (storm). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Kyrill (storm). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Kyrill (storm). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/Appenzellerbahn-quer.jpgWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:25, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Cyclone Kyrill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Cyclone Kyrill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I see that the article is at Kyrill (storm), to which Kyrill redirects. But wouldn't it be better to swap the two around: the article at Kyrill with Kyrill (storm) as a redirect? A ecis Bravado 21:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
This was the same system as the North American ice storm of 2007. Since it is the standards of the WikiProject to keep the same system on one article, should this be merged? (Although this is a very good article as it is) CrazyC83 23:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
My problem with this article name applies to all named European windstorms so I've raised the issue on WikiProject Meteorology. To summarize that in the context of this article:
This also makes a merger with the North American Ice storm feasible; as it can be put at a descriptive article title - with this page as a redirect.-- Nilf anion ( talk) 00:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The Quebec news network LCN (Francophone source only) is also using the name Cyril for the storm, [1] JForget 04:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC) Name Kyrill is used in the Czech Republic too. [2] Monika_46
The name Kyrill was also mentioned in a BBC news report, but either way, it is an unofficial, German name. A more generic, descriptive title for the article should probably be chosen. But which one? European windstorm of January 2007 is ambiguous because there already was a severe storm that affected Sweden and Norway (named Per (storm) by the Norwegian meteorological office). Oghmoir 09:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
"Kyrill" is also used in Austria and Switzerland. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
... as well as in France: fr:Kyrill_(tempête) and Le calme revient après la tempête Kyrill. It is an official name. -- 213.155.224.232 10:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
As this argument applies for all European windstorms, they should either all be labelled, or the tag removed frone this one. I'm removing it for now, as the right place to discuss a mass-renaming is at the Meteorology WikiProject mentioned above. Carcharoth 10:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
(indent reset) Umm, I object to all of these names. Not ONE of them is commonly known by these name outside of Germany, unlike Hurricane Ernesto (2006) which was known by that name globally. Yes sources outside Germany will pick them up, but for every news article you can find in the US referring to Kyrill by the name, you will find 100 that refer to it but don't use the name. The January 18 name has precedent, these storms are typically referred to by the day of impact in the UK (cf the Burns' Day storm); it isn't ambiguous really. Besides Lothar (storm) is very bad stylistically (not least as Lothar is used regularly).-- Nilf anion ( talk) 12:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
As well, if the name is kept I would suggest the title convention be European Windstorm Kyrill, to be in line with Tropical Storm Alpha, Hurricane Katrina, etc. Radagast 20:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Ehem... under no circumstance WP makes the name, it uses names other made. -- 213.155.224.232 23:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Re The Burns' Day storm. No need for a year at all in the title, it is simply referred to by everyone in the UK as the "Burns' Day Storm." The lowest pressure on this article is a little suspect by the way. I recorded a low of 986hPa myself. The lowest I saw this analysed by the Met Office was 962hPa. I can't see this storm getting a name in the UK, the one on the 30th October 2000 was pretty bad and didn't.
Where has this term "European Windstorm" come from by the way? The only time I've ever come across it in the UK is with the insurance industry rather than the meteorological community. P.K. 23:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe there is some precedent for the current name, per Erwin (storm), Lothar (storm) and Per (storm), but I would prefer a rename to European Windstorm Kyrill. The common naming pattern in similar categories seems to be <type of weather event> <name associated with the event>. A ecis Bravado 11:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I've put up requests for comments at WP:NC and WP:RFC. The way I currently see the discussion, this is a bit of a borderline case, as there's differing opinions between editors who want to use the de facto name and editors who want to use the WP:METEO convention. Given that WP:NC says "use common English name where available, and it has been said that there is no "common" English name for this storm, further input from experienced editors might be helpful. -- doco (☏) 15:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
There is no name for this storm in the UK so Kyrill even if it is only used in germany is the closest there is to a common name. Geni 15:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
While discussing the usage of the storm name in English speaking countries remember that some adopted the name to the English version "Cyril" (eg Australia, Ireland, U.K., India. -- 88.76.207.132 18:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Here's the historic description why and how hows and highs are named by the Deutsche Wetterdienst [6]: This practice has been well established for over 50 years and maintaining it is requested not only by the German Weather Service or by the commercial service providers but also, by the public. Apart from the US-Weather Service, the Institute of Meteorology is the only source for named vortices worldwide. -- 213.155.224.232 18:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Please calm down, people, and keep a cool head. It seems that the storm/extratropical cyclone/European windstorm is wreaking as much havoc on this talk page as in the real world. Noone will be hurt if the discussion lasts a day longer and the article remains here a day longer. And noone will be hurt if the article is moved to another name. Remember that you're arguing over a bunch of pixels. A ecis Bravado 18:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey folks, yeah, I'm joining in with this plea. Let's try and remain considerate, no need in getting ironic over any of this... such a disruptive event has already caused lots of distress, and some if not many of us editors may still worry about those we care for, and regard for the readers goes without saying. Let's stay cool. Thanks! and cheers - Introvert • ~ 21:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
34 in infobox, 35 in the article and 33 in Wikinews. Which is the true number of casualties? Deliogul 12:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I have added the two confirmed Belgian casualties to the list by country. The total in the header still reads 36- but the list adds up to 40. Should I change this?
There are two different values of maximum wind speed on the top of Snieżka presented, 212 and 216 km/h, NEEDS CHECKING. Moreover someone wrote that 216km/h is the highest speed ever recorded there - NOT TRUE - the highest wind speeds are: 228km/h (average), 288km/h (gusts), Polish speaking users can check it out at http://pogpol.chilan.com/rekordy.htm -- Domikot 13:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Here is a PD NOAA image of the storm system over the North Sea. Consider working it into the article. Edit as needed. Hope this is helpful. -- ChrisRuvolo ( t) 14:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know where this citation has gone? Sorry, but as I was organising the categories I noticed that Note 11 doesn't have anything other then two statements are using it as a citation.-- S kully Collins Edits 16:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Why are all the countries in bold in the latter sections of this article? Manderiko 16:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest that the article needs to be tidied up as follows. a. introduction b overview of meteorological situation and history of the storm c. split effects into different countries rather than different sectors. d. extremes across different areas affected. Yorkshiresky 18:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Can someone add that 1.7 million litres of oil were leaked in the Rotterdam Harbor? I don't really know how to write it and it got caused by Kyrill. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Camou ( talk • contribs) 23:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC).
There is no reason whatever to mention one victim specifically because of his job, while keeping all others anonymous. It is ok, to link the news as a reference, as well as linking from the wikipage of the manager (if any) to the storm and mentioning he died there. But he should not be treated as anything special in a list of statistics - as you know, all man should be treated equal and none more equal than the others.
Tp1024 23:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The 'original was first called Europe's January Storms, yet people disregarded this page and somewhat subsequently renamed it and deleted my history. Ok it was a long name but...Is this fair?. I firstly think it as done because I am seen as stupid because I am a High School student, but surely age doesn't matter. For what would the world and information be like around our world if it was not for people who are younger than 18! Brylcreem2 -- Brylcreem2 12:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
This article has been vandalised by 132.73.80.97, 15:40, 19 January 2007, changing the lowest pressure from < 964.8 hPa to ridiculous < 998.5 hPa. This has been corrected now. -- 88.76.207.132 10:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
The article appears to be a bit German-centric, even though almost the whole of Europe was affected. Can't we make it a bit more neutral? -- 81.152.178.228 12:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm not too thrilled about the first sentence of the article. It currently reads "Kyrill ... is the name given to a low pressure area that evolved into a violent European windstorm, ..." The part about "the name given to" is unnecessary: if the article says that "Kyrill is a low-pressure area etc.", then it's obvious that Kyrill is the name that was given to that low pressure area etc. Removing the words doesn't change anything, but it does improve the readability of the sentence. A ecis Bravado 15:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Well yeah. Section header says it all. Four pictures of basically the same thing is a bit.. boring. And the pictures are of a low quality. I suggest deleting some/all of them? -- Mystman666 ( Talk) 22:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
...erm, cleaning up the article. I have moved lots of text around and tried to sort evreything under an appropriate header. Would suggest to continue that way, otherwise the article will become an unreadable mess.
Things still read a little German-centric; in particular, there is very little about effects in Eastern Europe. Would suggest to check with Wikipedians from that region, if any are interested (note: the Dutch and Polish articles seem to be rather informative - anybody for translations?).
What's lacking: info on major damages to buildings etc., as well as reports from insurances on the extent of damage.
And if there is some comprehensive report by a national weather service, I'd strongly suggest to integrate it to get the meteorological facts right. Keep eyes open please. Kosebamse 07:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
The ski jumping event in Zakopane yesterday was overshadowed by massive storm-like winds, that got Czech ski jumper Jan Mazoch severely injured, in critical condition. Was this Kyrill as well, or was it unrelated? If it was Kyrill, should it be added to the article? A ecis Bravado 17:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
At some point we will destroy the climate so much that we will destroy ourselves. I really wish we loved our grandchildren more. Is there any other relative article that deals with the damage that we have done to our planet? StevenAR 00:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Damage costs are currently listed as "at least 1Bn Euro". BBC News say that "Swiss Re estimated that the cost of the damage winter storm Kyrill caused across Europe could be as high as £2.3bn ($4.5bn; 3.5bn euros)."
We know that Kyrill started of the 15th of Janurary, 2007. But, when did this strom end, and where? -- Tayuke 02:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I've added a template requesting an update to the section Kyrill (storm)#France. It currently says: "A woman in Lille is missing after the roof of a store collapsed." Is she still missing, after four months? A ecis Brievenbus 23:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Kyrill (storm). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Kyrill (storm). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Kyrill (storm). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/Appenzellerbahn-quer.jpgWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:25, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Cyclone Kyrill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Cyclone Kyrill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)