This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think the examples are wrong. They used to be definitely wrong but I changed them to at least be passably possible. Jdorje 02:15, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
For now, I've deleted the references to the Wiki articles on Fruits Basket and Kyo Sohma, as neither the anime nor the character have anything to do with the subject matter. Jake52 My talk 16:42, 16 June 2006 (EST)
This couldn't be the correct transliteration, could it? There's no "wh" in typical transliterations of Japanese words. Fujiwara would make sense. -- Rei 20:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I did a search on the NOAA site and got 66 hits for "Fujiwhara effect," but 94 hits for "Fujiwara effect," so even NOAA seems to prefer Fujiwara. "Fujiwhara" seems to be a misspelling that started at NOAA and took on a life of its own, like Lieutenant Kije. Jmkleeberg ( talk) 19:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
This is absolutely CORRECT spelling Fujiwhara. Sakuhei once explained why he chose the "wha" instead of "wa". It was recorded in a certain book published by NHK. Everybody must be aware that Japanese pronunciation is rather complicated and it is not possible to mechanically translate. In the case of Fujiwhara, Sakuhei tried his best to spell as much closer to the genuine pronunciation in his dialect. The point is; the pronunciation cannot be represented by using japanese so-called 50 sounds. If we manage to apply to 50 sounds, the pronunciation could be just between "fujihara" and "fujiwara". You can easily confirm this fact by visiting his town, where you will see so many "Fujihara" sign. I understand that many of you feel strange seeing the spell "Fujiwhara", but I hope many of you would understand the intention of Sakuhei who wanted to cherish the culture of his town like preserving the sound of his dialect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fujiwhara ( talk • contribs) 11:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Upon looking over the links from the Japanese Wikipedia entry, I am mostly convinced that the original spelling is in fact "Fujihara", which was subsequently changed by Fujihara himself to "Fujiwhara" to capture a regional dialect, and then changed to "Fujiwara" by unsuspecting writers. I would think that the proper course of action would be to propose a move of the article Sakuhei Fujiwara to Sakuhei Fujihara, and then a move of this article for consistency. Moving this article first is counterintuitive. I would like some more comments though since the Japanese sources themselves alternate between ふじわら and ふじはら. Comments? - Banyan Tree 14:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
You never transliterate わ as "wha". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itteyoshi ( talk • contribs) 21:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Super Typhoons Ivan and Joan may be of interest to this article. JTWC archive. KyuuA4 16:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Most of the examples given of the Fujiwhara/Fujiwara effect end with the two storms merging, so can we still say that it is "uncommon" for the two storms to merge? Jmkleeberg ( talk) 19:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
didnt these storm Fujiwhara effected, althought was breif, Boris Cristina, Omar 16, Ike Josephine, Marie Norbert Odile, Eric Fanele. HurricaneSpin ( talk) 06:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:ParmaMelor AMO TMO 2009279 lrg.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 22, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-09-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng { chat} 16:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
This image should be usefol in the Ron-Susan example: http://www.mindspring.com/~jbeven/rsk0504.gif
And this image is better than the one that is being used in the Ivan-Joan example: http://www.mindspring.com/~jbeven/ivjo1722.gif
ABC paulista ( talk) 19:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Both of the images don't show the systems clearly, but thank you very much for your suggestion, it is very interesting, but in bad quality..--
✯Earth100✯◕‿◕
Talk
Contribs
02:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Can someone add a section describing the underlying mechanics? It would be interesting to know why this happens. Cheers, -- Dan Bolser ( talk) 23:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Aren't all of the examples a little excessive? I don't wanna be bold and remove all of them, as this isn't that rare of an occurrence. IDK, any thoughts? --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 19:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Don't get rid of examples, that's nonsense! Viewers would really want to see the examples in history, nomater how notable, from a mere touch, to a total merge.-- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 02:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Since they are the most famous twins Tropical Cyclones ever recorded, and by far the most notable interaciton ever recorded in the Western Pacific Basin, their image is a must have. There's no other recorded interaction between Cat. 5 (Saffir-Simpson scale) Tropical Cyclones (Ron and Susan were bot Cat. 5 at the same time too, but I don't remember if they started interacting at that time, or they were weakening).
Besides, their interaction is way more notable than the interaction between a depression and a disturbance(not even a name these storms have!). ABC paulista ( talk) 17:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm planning on start a cleanup in this article, because there are too much examples and images in here, most of them unreferenced, non-notable interactions. So, I understand that is necessary to get rid of some irrelevant examples and images. First, the unsourced ones. After it, we see what are the best examples to keep in the article.
But, I wanna know your opinion before taking some action. ABC paulista ( talk) 17:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to fix it when i have time but for now, leave at it is.--
✯Earth100✯◕‿◕
Talk
Contribs
05:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey, WHY not show a gallery of interactions? That why, it would be organized, less side images, and expanded! Besides, viewers would see examples in images, which show more than just words. I suggest a little gallery for every basin section(bottom), that means seven gallery. With a gallery, images that aren't really in high quality like ABC's suggested image will be accepted more! We are talking about an variable event, which means there's a need for a gallery! -- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 14:09, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
On why do things just aren't as good as they were?-- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 02:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
It does not makes sense, every high quality image shows the phenomenon, and NOW IT"S JUST BEING REMOVED, LEAVING only a grey, shaky, blured picture of an non-notable effect! Look, i am desperate to FIND a reference! Now, the page looks more uglier than ever! Fujiwhara effect is something that is short term, not common, and needs images! It's was once so organized, and now it's just a mess! Look, just think about it.-- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 02:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I can make GIF image loops, however they don't animate unless you click into it! That's the problem! Just look at the megi article, i've made a satellite loop showing the storm's life from formation to death but it won't animate! -- ✯Earth100✯◕⌢◕ Talk Contribs 05:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
That isn't a good video, as it is too disorganize, and viewers won't be able to see clearly on what's going on, so i don't think it should be included in the video.-- ✯Earth100✯◕⌢◕ Talk Contribs 05:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Their are, in fact, many of this ex lows which underwent an well defined interaction. I'll have to find it.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 11:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey champz, I found two interesting satellite images about the Fujiwhara interaction between Yule and 16W, but they were shot by the Geostationary Meteorological Satellite, which is Japanese. So, I don't know if they can be uploaded, or it goes against copyright laws. ABC paulista ( talk) 18:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Could this simple Diagram be added into the article? -- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 11:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, i think this image is a lot simpler to understand for viewer's unlike ABC's complicated image.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 00:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
The illustration made by Earth100 is very good at all, but it has some issues:
1- The original image was heavily edited, so it's not under NOAA's licensing anymore. There's some copyright problems.
2- There's no reliable reference that claims that Ione and Kirsten made part of a Fujiwhara Effect.
3- The illustration claims that Hurricane Kirsten shoud have taken a SW direction, and Ione a NE direction. But, at that time, Kirsten went to the SE, while Ione went to the NW.
So, until these issues haven't been solved, I'll revert back to the standart diagram. ABC paulista ( talk) 14:52, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Due to the uncertainty of whether or not 2 cyclones have interacted, a diagram showing no real life interaction, should be needed in this article. This image, i've created is similar to this image, which could be very useful. Any comments suggestions? -- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 08:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
All your suggestions was welcome, ABC, however i did a lot of hard work, and sacrifice a lot of time, and i did a lot of measures to make it a good as possible, so i would like to have more comments from other users, before making any further move. Thank You for your reply.--
✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉
Talk
Contribs
04:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
There is no need for a gallery on this page. We have enough pictures that illustrate the topic already. Furthermore, any meteorological claims (other than basic observations) in captions need to be supported. Inks.LWC ( talk) 14:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Alpha was absorbed by Wilma as shown here: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurricanes/archives/2005/h2005_alpha.html The result was true.-- ✯Earth100✯ (talk✉) 14:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Absorption = Fujiwhara effect, as it is an interaction. If the law has to go with yours, why does the article has a few examples of systems merging or absorbing? This is ridiculous! Besides, a sentence sates it here in the article that Alpha was absorbed by Wilma, and why can't we show a picture of it for viewers to get more information like, a view of there own? You should wake up from your sleep.-- ✯Earth100✯ (talk✉) 02:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fujiwhara effect. 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) 17:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think the examples are wrong. They used to be definitely wrong but I changed them to at least be passably possible. Jdorje 02:15, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
For now, I've deleted the references to the Wiki articles on Fruits Basket and Kyo Sohma, as neither the anime nor the character have anything to do with the subject matter. Jake52 My talk 16:42, 16 June 2006 (EST)
This couldn't be the correct transliteration, could it? There's no "wh" in typical transliterations of Japanese words. Fujiwara would make sense. -- Rei 20:49, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I did a search on the NOAA site and got 66 hits for "Fujiwhara effect," but 94 hits for "Fujiwara effect," so even NOAA seems to prefer Fujiwara. "Fujiwhara" seems to be a misspelling that started at NOAA and took on a life of its own, like Lieutenant Kije. Jmkleeberg ( talk) 19:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
This is absolutely CORRECT spelling Fujiwhara. Sakuhei once explained why he chose the "wha" instead of "wa". It was recorded in a certain book published by NHK. Everybody must be aware that Japanese pronunciation is rather complicated and it is not possible to mechanically translate. In the case of Fujiwhara, Sakuhei tried his best to spell as much closer to the genuine pronunciation in his dialect. The point is; the pronunciation cannot be represented by using japanese so-called 50 sounds. If we manage to apply to 50 sounds, the pronunciation could be just between "fujihara" and "fujiwara". You can easily confirm this fact by visiting his town, where you will see so many "Fujihara" sign. I understand that many of you feel strange seeing the spell "Fujiwhara", but I hope many of you would understand the intention of Sakuhei who wanted to cherish the culture of his town like preserving the sound of his dialect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fujiwhara ( talk • contribs) 11:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Upon looking over the links from the Japanese Wikipedia entry, I am mostly convinced that the original spelling is in fact "Fujihara", which was subsequently changed by Fujihara himself to "Fujiwhara" to capture a regional dialect, and then changed to "Fujiwara" by unsuspecting writers. I would think that the proper course of action would be to propose a move of the article Sakuhei Fujiwara to Sakuhei Fujihara, and then a move of this article for consistency. Moving this article first is counterintuitive. I would like some more comments though since the Japanese sources themselves alternate between ふじわら and ふじはら. Comments? - Banyan Tree 14:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
You never transliterate わ as "wha". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itteyoshi ( talk • contribs) 21:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Super Typhoons Ivan and Joan may be of interest to this article. JTWC archive. KyuuA4 16:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Most of the examples given of the Fujiwhara/Fujiwara effect end with the two storms merging, so can we still say that it is "uncommon" for the two storms to merge? Jmkleeberg ( talk) 19:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
didnt these storm Fujiwhara effected, althought was breif, Boris Cristina, Omar 16, Ike Josephine, Marie Norbert Odile, Eric Fanele. HurricaneSpin ( talk) 06:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:ParmaMelor AMO TMO 2009279 lrg.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 22, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-09-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng { chat} 16:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
This image should be usefol in the Ron-Susan example: http://www.mindspring.com/~jbeven/rsk0504.gif
And this image is better than the one that is being used in the Ivan-Joan example: http://www.mindspring.com/~jbeven/ivjo1722.gif
ABC paulista ( talk) 19:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Both of the images don't show the systems clearly, but thank you very much for your suggestion, it is very interesting, but in bad quality..--
✯Earth100✯◕‿◕
Talk
Contribs
02:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Can someone add a section describing the underlying mechanics? It would be interesting to know why this happens. Cheers, -- Dan Bolser ( talk) 23:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Aren't all of the examples a little excessive? I don't wanna be bold and remove all of them, as this isn't that rare of an occurrence. IDK, any thoughts? --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 19:13, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Don't get rid of examples, that's nonsense! Viewers would really want to see the examples in history, nomater how notable, from a mere touch, to a total merge.-- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 02:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Since they are the most famous twins Tropical Cyclones ever recorded, and by far the most notable interaciton ever recorded in the Western Pacific Basin, their image is a must have. There's no other recorded interaction between Cat. 5 (Saffir-Simpson scale) Tropical Cyclones (Ron and Susan were bot Cat. 5 at the same time too, but I don't remember if they started interacting at that time, or they were weakening).
Besides, their interaction is way more notable than the interaction between a depression and a disturbance(not even a name these storms have!). ABC paulista ( talk) 17:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm planning on start a cleanup in this article, because there are too much examples and images in here, most of them unreferenced, non-notable interactions. So, I understand that is necessary to get rid of some irrelevant examples and images. First, the unsourced ones. After it, we see what are the best examples to keep in the article.
But, I wanna know your opinion before taking some action. ABC paulista ( talk) 17:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm going to fix it when i have time but for now, leave at it is.--
✯Earth100✯◕‿◕
Talk
Contribs
05:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey, WHY not show a gallery of interactions? That why, it would be organized, less side images, and expanded! Besides, viewers would see examples in images, which show more than just words. I suggest a little gallery for every basin section(bottom), that means seven gallery. With a gallery, images that aren't really in high quality like ABC's suggested image will be accepted more! We are talking about an variable event, which means there's a need for a gallery! -- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 14:09, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
On why do things just aren't as good as they were?-- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 02:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
It does not makes sense, every high quality image shows the phenomenon, and NOW IT"S JUST BEING REMOVED, LEAVING only a grey, shaky, blured picture of an non-notable effect! Look, i am desperate to FIND a reference! Now, the page looks more uglier than ever! Fujiwhara effect is something that is short term, not common, and needs images! It's was once so organized, and now it's just a mess! Look, just think about it.-- ✯Earth100✯◕‿◕ Talk Contribs 02:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
I can make GIF image loops, however they don't animate unless you click into it! That's the problem! Just look at the megi article, i've made a satellite loop showing the storm's life from formation to death but it won't animate! -- ✯Earth100✯◕⌢◕ Talk Contribs 05:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
That isn't a good video, as it is too disorganize, and viewers won't be able to see clearly on what's going on, so i don't think it should be included in the video.-- ✯Earth100✯◕⌢◕ Talk Contribs 05:47, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Their are, in fact, many of this ex lows which underwent an well defined interaction. I'll have to find it.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 11:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Hey champz, I found two interesting satellite images about the Fujiwhara interaction between Yule and 16W, but they were shot by the Geostationary Meteorological Satellite, which is Japanese. So, I don't know if they can be uploaded, or it goes against copyright laws. ABC paulista ( talk) 18:58, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
Could this simple Diagram be added into the article? -- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 11:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, i think this image is a lot simpler to understand for viewer's unlike ABC's complicated image.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 00:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
The illustration made by Earth100 is very good at all, but it has some issues:
1- The original image was heavily edited, so it's not under NOAA's licensing anymore. There's some copyright problems.
2- There's no reliable reference that claims that Ione and Kirsten made part of a Fujiwhara Effect.
3- The illustration claims that Hurricane Kirsten shoud have taken a SW direction, and Ione a NE direction. But, at that time, Kirsten went to the SE, while Ione went to the NW.
So, until these issues haven't been solved, I'll revert back to the standart diagram. ABC paulista ( talk) 14:52, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Due to the uncertainty of whether or not 2 cyclones have interacted, a diagram showing no real life interaction, should be needed in this article. This image, i've created is similar to this image, which could be very useful. Any comments suggestions? -- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉ Talk Contribs 08:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
All your suggestions was welcome, ABC, however i did a lot of hard work, and sacrifice a lot of time, and i did a lot of measures to make it a good as possible, so i would like to have more comments from other users, before making any further move. Thank You for your reply.--
✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉
Talk
Contribs
04:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
There is no need for a gallery on this page. We have enough pictures that illustrate the topic already. Furthermore, any meteorological claims (other than basic observations) in captions need to be supported. Inks.LWC ( talk) 14:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Alpha was absorbed by Wilma as shown here: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hurricanes/archives/2005/h2005_alpha.html The result was true.-- ✯Earth100✯ (talk✉) 14:25, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Absorption = Fujiwhara effect, as it is an interaction. If the law has to go with yours, why does the article has a few examples of systems merging or absorbing? This is ridiculous! Besides, a sentence sates it here in the article that Alpha was absorbed by Wilma, and why can't we show a picture of it for viewers to get more information like, a view of there own? You should wake up from your sleep.-- ✯Earth100✯ (talk✉) 02:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fujiwhara effect. 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) 17:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)