Talk:Cyclones Gulab and Shaheen
(Redirected from Talk:Cyclone Gulab–Shaheen)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Prisoner of Zenda in topic Times, etc.
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cyclones Gulab and Shaheen 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 Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) 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. |
 | A news item involving Cyclones Gulab and Shaheen was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 7 October 2021. |  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
 | Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
|
The draft is not ready edit
The draft is definitely not ready to be shifted to the mainspace. Many errors and lack of content for the storm. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:07, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- HurricaneEdgar, Replying to this comment
if you thick(think) is not ready, why should expand improving it.
Exactly, we should expand and improve in the draft space. We can't show an incomplete version of the article, with dubious errors and atleast quarter of the content are copied from the season's article.Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:11, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
we should expand improve no need make moving the draft, reader need information reganding this Storm HurricaneEdgar 12:23, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- HurricaneEdgar, If the info remains incomplete, so how the reader will understand about the storm :-/ Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
well we should improve and expand the article if there incomplete just like Hurricane Ida (not moving the draft) :) HurricaneEdgar 12:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Beraniladri19: I don't see why this is not ready for mainspace yet. If you do happen to find errors, it would be much more beneficial to fix them now before the draft is moved to mainspace, or perhaps fix them when they're moved to mainspace. "Lack of content" doesn't seem to apply here — there's over 1.9k words detailing meteorological history and impacts. Chlod (say hi!) 12:54, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- Chlod, Probably I'm too perfectionist that's why :-( Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 15:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Beraniladri19: Perfection isn't required at all on Wikipedia (although it is something to strive for), so it's perfectly alright to publish a draft in this state. On another note, Hurricane Noah did inform me off-wiki that the article might benefit from a note explaining the reasoning behind the two names. Perhaps you can add this in the article to make it more complete?
Chlod (say hi!) 15:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Beraniladri19: Perfection isn't required at all on Wikipedia (although it is something to strive for), so it's perfectly alright to publish a draft in this state. On another note, Hurricane Noah did inform me off-wiki that the article might benefit from a note explaining the reasoning behind the two names. Perhaps you can add this in the article to make it more complete?
- Chlod, Probably I'm too perfectionist that's why :-( Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 15:09, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Dealing with merges edit
@LightandDark2000 and HurricaneParrot: Whenever dealing with draft merges, please do not tag the page with {{histmerge}} and instead move the previous draft into a talk subpage of the article, as per WP:PVER. The target and source pages, this page and Draft:Cyclone Shaheen (now at Talk:Cyclones Gulab and Shaheen/Cyclone Shaheen) cannot be history merged since they do not consist of the same base page nor do they have equal page content even before the history merge. Although it is technically possible, it'll pollute the page history with confusing text. Since the page can't be moved to a redirect (as all of them have already been made) I've moved Draft:Cyclone Shaheen into the proper subpage and modified this talk page's {{copied}} template to reflect the change. Please consider this for the future. Thanks. Chlod (say hi!) 13:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Aren't these the same system? edit
The Joint Typhoon Warning Center has Gulab and Shaheen as the same system, 03B. SolarisPenguin (talk) 07:46, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
- While they may be the same system, this article articulates how Gulab disintegrated over India and Shaheen was making landfall in Oman. (see https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/10/shaheen-headed-for-historic-landfall-in-oman/). User: Jurisdicta| reply here Jurisdicta (talk) 03:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Meteorological history - Gulab edit
"There was also the presence of warm moist air over the center of the system, which was conductive for strengthening." I believe the word should be "conducive" (Concise Oxford Dictionary - 'leading or contributing to (result)'), not "conductive" (COD - 'having the property of conducting'; but as "conduction" means 'transmission (of heat or electricity by contact etc.)', the author may have intended "conductive" in a thermodynamic (i.e. heat) sense. I therefore haven't changed it, just in case I've misunderstood. Perhaps others would like to comment? Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 04:13, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Impacts - Gulab edit
Ref. 57 refers to this statement: "At least 20 total deaths have been attributed to Gulab" — but ref. 57 is not about Gulab, it's about Shaheen: "Shaheen claims at least 13 lives in historic Oman landfall"
Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 09:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Times, etc. edit
Under Meteorological history for Gulab, the status of the system is given at various times.
| Date | Time | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 24 Sept. | 03:00 UTC (08:30 IST) | IMD noted the system as a low-pressure area |
| 06:00 UTC (11:30 IST) | System has developed a cyclonic vortex | |
| 11:00 UTC (16:30 IST) | System upgraded to a well-marked low-pressure area | |
| 15:00 UTC (20:30 IST) | IMD upgraded system to a Depression | |
| 25 Sept. | 03:00 UTC | System upgraded to a Deep Depression |
| 15:00 UTC (20:30 IST) | IMD upgraded system to a Cyclonic Storm - Gulab | |
| 18:00 IST (12:30 UTC) | Commencement of landfall | |
| 17:00 UTC (10:30 IST) | Gulab crosses coast north of Kalingapatnam | |
| 21:00 UTC (02:30 IST) | JTWC issued final warning prior to landfall | |
| 26 Sept. | 00:00 UTC (05:30 IST) | IMD downgraded system to a deep depression |
| 20:00 IST (14:30 UTC) | System downgraded to a depression | |
| 14:00 IST (08:30 UTC) | System now a well-marked low-pressure area |
There are several anomalies to note.
- From the start of the chronology on 24 Sept. until 1500 UTC on 25 Sept. the time is given as "UTC (IST)", but then switches to "IST (UTC)" for one entry before reverting to UTC-IST for the rest of 25 Sept. — but all of 26 Sept. is IST-UTC. This makes for difficult reading. The article should stick with one or the other; I suggest the UTC-IST format, as there's less to change.
- Only the UTC time is given for the first assessment on 25 Sept.
- 17:00 UTC (25 Sept.) is not 10:30 IST; the correct figure is 22:30 IST.
- I have interpolated the time for the first assessment on 26 Sept. based on "3 hours later".
- The nomenclature is inconsistent. As the system develops, it progresses from a "Depression" to a "Deep Depression" (note the initial upper-case letters); but as it dissipates, it becomes a "deep depression" followed by a "depression".
- Bizarrely, the JTWC's final warning "prior to landfall" is actually several hours after landfall! If the final warning was on 24 Sept. the sequence would be correct (though the system wasn't yet officially a cyclone).
In the table below I have tried to correct the anomalies, and have added the extra detail that's in the text.
| Date | UTC | IST | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24 Sept. | JTWC noted that a system producing tropical storm-force winds was located over the east-central Bay of Bengal, 211 nmi (391 km; 243 mi) south of Chittagong, Bangladesh; system designated as 03B.[8] | ||
| 03:00 | 08:30 | IMD noted the system as a low-pressure area, forming from a cyclonic circulation persisting over the Gulf of Martaban.[9][10] | |
| 06:00 | 11:30 | System developed a cyclonic vortex | |
| 11:00 | 16:30 | System upgraded to a well-marked low-pressure area[11][12] | |
| 15:00 | 20:30 | Favourable conditions, such as moderate to high sea-surface temperatures, the Madden–Julian oscillation being favourable for tropical cyclone development, and low vertical wind shear, allowed intensification; also the thunderstorms were moving in a curved manner.[13] IMD therefore upgraded the system to a Depression. | |
| 21:00 | 02:30 | JTWC issued final warning prior to landfall | |
| 25 Sept. | 03:00 | 08:30 | System upgraded to a Deep Depression because its convection further intensified near the centre. There was also the presence of warm moist air over the centre of the system, which was conducive for strengthening.[14][15] |
| 12:30 | 18:00 | The outer rainbands reached the coastal regions of northern Andhra Pradesh and southern Odisha, indicated that the cyclone had started making landfall | |
| 15:00 | 20:30 | IMD upgraded system to a Cyclonic Storm, as its convection had became better-organized, with a defined central dense overcast[16]; the cyclone was named Gulab.[16][17] | |
| 17:00 | 22:30 | Gulab crosses coast 20 km (12.4 miles) north of Kalingapatnam | |
| 26 Sept. | 00:00 | 05:30 | Having lost its energy after travelling over rough Indian terrain, the system was downgraded by IMD to a Deep Depression.[21] |
| 14:30 | 20:00 | The system further weakened into a Depression as it entered the state of Telangana.[22] The system maintained its intensity as it travelled westward | |
| 08:30 | 14:00 | The system weakened into a well-marked low-pressure area over west Vidarbha.[23] |
- JTWC = Joint Typhoon Warning Center
- IMD = India Meteorological Department
Some additional comments
- I don't have the expertise to reduce the fourth column and expand the first column so that, where possible, the rows with the dates are reduced in height.
- The table above mentions the Gulf of Martaban where the storm system formed. I have attached an annotated map of the system's path using Meow's graphic ... and the GoM is about 500 km SE of the start location of the system's path - and over a mountain range as well! I suggest, therefore, that reference to the GoM is incorrect.
- If 17:00 UTC is correct for the cyclone crossing the cost, the storm system was upgraded to cyclone only 2 hours earlier ... but Meow shows the cyclone (round dots) starting about 200 km off the coast of Myanmar, i.e. 800 km from landfall. That's an incredible storm system that travels 800 km in 2 hours!
- I have drawn the approx path across India ... assuming the path is reasonably accurate, Gulab also affected Chhattisgarh - but it's not mentioned. (Incidentally, Vidharba is not a State ... it's eastern Maharashtra.)
- It would be good if the graphic can be annotated to correspond with the development of the system to Gulab and its demise, and to Shaheen and its demise.
If you think this table is easier to read than a text paragraph, let me know and I'll do the same for Shaheen.
Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 11:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)