Talk:List of storms in the 2006 Pacific hurricane season/Archive 2

Espanol

Since pretty much everyone in the path of John speaks Spanish, does anyone know if the es Wikipedia has an article for it? They don't have an article for the season... Does anyone know Spanish and can whip one up? --Golbez 22:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

My Spanish is okay but not perfect (I believe User:Titoxd is a fluent speaker). I could start one off if that's okay. Pobbie Rarr 02:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've made a start. Unfortunately I have to go now so if anyone else can contribute, please do. Pobbie Rarr 03:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

You know, looking up Wikipedia in Spanish is very intresting. It will really help me out in my Spanish classes. But, through Babelfish translations, I was looking for Hurricane articles(los articulos Huricàns en Espanol, I think. Pardon the Spanglish.) and there are no season pages. As a matter of fact the only página (page) I could find conserning hurricanes was Andrew. Strange. I'm just saying, people learn spanish to work on wikipedia en espanol. They need hurricane articles. guitarhero777777 05:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No, they didn't have an article on Ernesto, and I'll take a look at the rough sketch. Titoxd^(?!?) 05:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

My bad. They do have unupdated hurricane season pages (dating back to Beryl.), but not a lot, (no Charley).guitarhero777777 05:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

BBC photos?

The BBC currently has a short photo gallery concerning Hurricane John [1]. Are they okay to use as public domain images? Pobbie Rarr 00:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Doubt it. The only way we can use them is if they're a product of the US government, or if it's fair use (ask an admin about that). Hurricanehink (talk) 01:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Not fair use, as our usage would be competing directly with BBC's commercial interest (meaning, if we use it, then people don't have to visit BBC's website, or pay BBC for it). Titoxd^(?!?) 04:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

You mean AP don't you?--Nilfanion (talk) 16:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Carlotta TCR

Carlotta-Thats 4.Mitchazenia 19:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

EPac hurricane/storm articles

In the Atlantic hurricane season's talk page, User:Caerwine thought of making up of a criteria of when to make storm articles in the Atlantic, but I've also come up with my criteria for the EPac basin, and here it is.

1. Any Category 3 or higher when it at least makes a hurricane watch when its a threat to land, regardless of landfall.

2. Any Category 1 or higher when it at least makes a hurricane warning when its a threat to land, regardless of landfall.

3. Any tropical storm that makes a landfall.

4. Any tropical storm or higher that makes more than 1 million dollars in damage.

5. Any hurricane or storm that makes more than a dozen deaths or fatalities.

6. Any tropical storm or hurricane that exists longer than 15 days.

6. Any cross-over hurricane/storms, like a Atlantic to EPac crossing storm, or a EPac to CPac crossing storm, or a EPac or a CPac storm that crosses the dateline to the WPac.

Any extra ideas or comments (or even some criticisms)? --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody _{(talk + contribs + userboxes)} 02:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

No offense, but that's way too rulecruft. Similar to the Atlantic, I think the criteria should be information. For example, Daniel could probably be a decent article based on its long storm history, as well as potential threat to Hawaii and its strength. Kristy might be a decent article once its done, due to its weird path. However, it would be a lot harder to write one for Gilma, for example. The criteria should be how much information is out there, how much can be expanded upon in its own article, and how well-written it is. All of the above would probably qualify, but it's much simpler than that. If someone wants to make an article on Gilma, and they do a good job using all of the available information out there, provided it's not a copy of the TCR or storm section I'm fine with having it. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I understand what you mean Hink, about the amount of information, but several users have been in debating disscussions and arguements on how and when to write storm articles. I'm not trying to be a tyrant, but I'm rathering trying to give a draft proposal criteria on how and when to write storm articles so users don't have to be in a fuss about it. --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody _{(talk + contribs + userboxes)} 02:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be made when there's enough info. If you're doing it currently, you'll need to cite every TWO and discussion for the storm history, unless somewhere else has a summary. Also, as mentioned elsewhere, storm articles should be on a storm by storm basis. Every storm is different, and likewise every storm has different media coverage. Hurricanehink (talk) 03:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Way too much instruction creep imo. Definite no. – Chacor 03:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

It is definitely harder to find rules to create articles for Epac than Atlantic, due to the general fact that EPac storms have less information plus are generally less intresting and avoided by news media (John is the exception). I think if the intensity is enough (Cat 5s due to rarity in EPac, 1997 Linda a good example)it should warrant an article. Long lasting ones (Ioke + Daniel) warrant an article if they last long enough to be notable. (1992 Tina is a good example of length of time, but we do need to find more info on that storm.) Ones that threaten land or make landfall in any way (John + Daniel again), should be added. Of course, info is the variable here, so editors should use thier best judgement when creating articles, as always. guitarhero777777 04:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

But hey, isen't Wikipedia supposed to create and improve articles? Cause I think we have cut down too many very notable storms like cross-over storms and long-duration storms and some annular hurricanes and even Category 5 hurricanes. --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody _{(talk + contribs + userboxes)} 00:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, most cross-over storms have been retired... Irene in 71 is the only one that doesn't have an article. The two major things to consider is whether there's info and whether someone wants to take the time to make an article. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Ioke track

Ioke's track is somewhat outdated. Can anyone update it? --IrfanFaiz 05:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Usually, User:Nilfanion does the storm track maps, but he's been quite absent for a while. --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody _{(talk + contribs + userboxes)} 01:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

He still looks pretty active to me. bob rulz 05:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I updated it. Reub2000 06:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I checked the commons page and Reub does the tracks since it was born. --IrfanFaiz 10:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Button Bar

I see CrazyC83 added a button bar to the Lane page, but Chacor reverted it, saying we had the discussion before not to use it. Personally, I think we should add them back in. The season already has 3 articles (Ioke, John, and Lane), more than some Atlantic seasons that have button bars (1987 has one article but has one). Furthermore, there has been some interest in making an article for Daniel and Kristy. For anyone that hasn't seen it, here it is.

Given that the template already exists, what's the harm in keeping and using it? Hurricanehink (talk) 18:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, we've had a fair few storms thus far so it's worth keeping. Pobbie Rarr 19:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Well Hink, Chacor is usually a strict guy who forbids like making storm articles until they're dead. And also, Daniel has been "nominated" several times for an article, so did Kristy for something notable about them but Chacor just won't allow it. — § Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody _{(T + U + E + C)} - (Remembering 9/11) 19:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Neither Daniel nor Kristy affected land. Pacific storms which don't impact anywhere don't receive an article, apart from extreme cases (like John in 1994, which officially lasted longer than any other tropical cyclone on Earth). Daniel becoming annular and Kristy regaining tropical storm status are not notable enough. Pobbie Rarr 19:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why East Pacific fishspinner storms can't have articles if Atlantic fishspinner storms do. I don't think any fishspinner storm should have an article, but as long we are making them and won't stop making them anytime soon, then why not? And correction: regained tropical storm status twice. bob rulz 19:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

If it is a decent effort, go for it. Just make sure to work on it as a sandbox in your userspace before, so it doesn't get redirected before you finish. Titoxd^(?!?) 21:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That was unexpected. We're not talking about Chacor or whether storms are notable for articles. We're only talking about whether we should use the button bar. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't see what the harm is in having it now. There's enough storms, some of them with articles, to warrant it. Titoxd^(?!?) 21:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Daniel should get an article because it maintained an incredible intensity. On the other hand, I don't see anything noteworthy about Hurricane Kristy. Reub2000 03:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

It was just a Cat 4, and not a particularly powerful one, either. We don't even have articles for all of the EPac Cat 5s. —Cuiviénen 03:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I assume your talking about Daniel. I'm all for the button bar. guitarhero777777 03:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Does the I for Ioke have the asterisk because it was CPac, or does it mean something else? If so shouldn't 2C have one as well? 85.210.145.244 11:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

The asterisk does indeed denote that Ioke was a Central Pacific storm. However, 2C does not require an asterisk because its very name shows that it is part of the Central Pacific. Pobbie Rarr 12:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, shouldn't it say what the asterix means the bar itself then? Without a key it is meaningless. Jamie|C 14:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I suppose so. Pobbie Rarr 14:38, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I changed it, but if you dont like it, feel free to revert it back. It looks a bit odd under the bar, but the syntax won't let me put it anywhere else without rewriting the whole thing. Jamie|C 21:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Mistake with hurricane Lane

On the information box from hurricane Lane says: 120mph winds, while the strongest were 125mph winds. the mbar's are correct. Memicho 16:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

{{sofixit}}. – Chacor 16:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

lol Memicho 18:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

done Memicho 18:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Hector TCR

Hector's TCR is out. -- WmE 14:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Link. Pobbie Rarr 20:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

They changed the intensity I noticed - it was 95kt (not 90kt) and the pressure was 9 mbar lower (966 vs. 975)... CrazyC83 02:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Miriam TCR

it's out, i'd add the link but i g2g. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 23:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Fabio TCR

Ditto Miriam. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 23:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Ileana TCR

Coming out like flies. Ileana is out. [2] CrazyC83 20:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly, probably expect Bud and Daniel last (Daniel especially). Where the heck is Emilia's report? She didnt do much. Does the CPHC write reports for storms?HurricaneCraze32 aka Mitchazenia 21:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Not to speculate, but Lane will probably be one of the last, given that it was the most recent not to have a report, and also the most impacting. Hurricanehink (talk) 21:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't John fall under the category for most impacting? He is recent also.

Probably gonna be:

1. Emilia
2. Bud
3. Kristy
4. John
5. Lane
6. Daniel

HurricaneCraze32 aka Mitchazenia 21:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, this isn't a forum, so there's no need to discuss this here. Relating to the article, Lane is about as impacting as John, possibly moreso due to higher damage total (Lane= $110 million, John=$60 million). Hurricanehink (talk) 21:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Lane

Don't you think he deserves an archive- a little more worthy than Daniel somewhat.HurricaneCraze32 aka Mitchazenia 18:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Storms get specialized archives when there was a lot of discussion about it. If there was not a lot to say about Lane, there was thus not a lot to archive. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe the "norm" is to archive a storm seperately when the section is long enough to get the warning at the top of a page, ie: This page is xx kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see article size. Recently that has not been the case, as John and a lot of the Atlantic storms have had archives reguardless of size. Ajm⁸¹ 22:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Another TCR

Kristy this time. And it's Avila's work ;)--Nilfanion (talk) 15:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Track Maps

Is someone working on track maps for 2C,3C and 4C?Mitchazenia V3.0 19:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

There's no best track yet. Hurricanehink (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

A LOT of Pacific storms lately

This Pacific season has seen a lot of storms. Already, there have been 16 East and Central Pacific storms, and 20 depressions, compared with just 9 storms and 9 (,or 10, a new depression might form) depressions, in the Atlantic. It might be caused by El Nino. If you look at it, the 2006 season has been similar to the 1997 season, both in the Atlantic and the Pacific. Maybe there's a 9-year cycle or something in the Ocean, noting that there's an 11-year sunspot cycle on the sun. The Atlantic season seems almost over, although the Pacific season is still going strong. AstroHurricane001 13:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

El Nino comes and goes at random intervals. 2002 was also an El Nino year, albeit a weak one, and 1991-94 was a strong and prolonged El Nino, followed by the strong correctional La Nina of 1995. (Also, this is not the place for amateur meteorology.) —Cuiviénen 13:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Does this count? I've also noticed a trend about El Niños. After a slow Atlantic season due to El Niño, the next year always seems to be a little more active. Which is why I predict a slower EPAC season for next year, and a more active ATL season for next year. But, that's just my personal opinion based on past occurences. I am not a meteorologist. (though I want to be) →Cyclone1→ 14:26, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I seem to have also noticed a trend in El Ninos and La Ninas. Some El Nino/La Nina trends last only one year, and some last several years, and seems to undergo a repeated pattern. Some transitions from El Nino to La Nina (and vice versa) occur in just one year, and some stages seem to last several years. Some years are near normal all over the globe. The duststorms and rain in the Sahara might also affect the Atlantic. AstroHurricane001 18:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Now if you look at it, TD 16E of 2005 dissipated two days ago, and thanks to Paul, we have surpassed 2004 and 2005. And we're four days from the end of 2003. So we're doing very well.Mitchazenia V3.0 21:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

But with 16 named storms for this year, it is an exactly normal or averge season with about 110 ACE. So this would beat pretty much the 2001, 2003, 2004, and 2005 EPac seasons while 2000 EPac season had 17 named storms but with a less ACE and with the 2002 season with more ACE but with fewer named storms. But this would be a perfect example of a EPac season on a mild El Nino season. — Alastor Moody _{(T + C + U)} 23:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Somewhat. Even though with 18-E/Rosa forming, we will tie 1997 for getting up to R name.<font color="green">Mitchazenia V4.0</font> 16:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

In an odd coincedence, if get a Rosa it will be the third consecutive time a season using this name list has reached Rosa. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 23:22, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Here comes Cat. 2 Sergio! This season won't quit! Weatherman90 00:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Tropical Depression Eighteen-E TCR

Just giving a head's up... It's out. It's also ready for a track map. Good kitty 18:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

The storm dissipated like a week ago. Since when is NHC this early? -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 06:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I was shocked myself that this TCR came out so soon, but 18E didn't last very long or have any land impact, and there probably wasn't anything in need of reanalysis. It formed, it lasted a day, and it dissipated. The fact that the season's winding down and there's much less activity is probably another reason it came out so soon. --Coredesat 06:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Probably a case of wanting to do something fast in the head office, and they wanted to pass their time with something quickly productive. Like when we make quickie sections or articles. CrazyC83 23:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Could this be a recored of the fastest TCR distibuted by the NHC after the storm dissipated (just being curious)? — Alastor Moody _{(T + C + U)} 06:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Not quite. The TCR for Hurricane Noel in 2001 came out eight days after it dissipated, while the TCR for Tropical Storm Peter in 2003 came out just six days after it dissipated. However, the record, at least what seems to be, is the TCR for Tropical Storm Otto in 2004, just four days after it dissipated. Even more incredible about Otto was that it was a remnant low for two days after it dissipated, meaning the TCR came out two days after it was truly done. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

That's crazy. Just two days after it dissipated. I guess that they were analyzing it as it was going and they just spent those first two days analyzing the satellite data and two days writing the report. That's probably what they strive for for every storm but this happened to be the one time where everything worked perfectly. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 16:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Tropical Depression Twenty-E TCR is out

That's fast service Good kitty 20:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Holy stinkin cow. This is fast.Mitchazenia(7300+edits) 20:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, was Olivia there before? I know the date says late October, but I thought the last one was Miriam. Good kitty 21:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

No, it was just uploaded in the past hour. --Ajm⁸¹ 21:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Depressions are a bit easier to crank out because you don't have to write a full report. The thing with Otto in '04 that Hink brought up is pretty amazing. NHC should start to churn 'em out a little faster now that the seasons are drawing to a close and they just have miscreant Pacific storms to deal with. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 23:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Holy motherfu...! the NHC must be going nuts right now, they send an instant TCR only 3 stinking days after 20E died. Thats like the record of the fastest when the NHC issued out a TCR to a dead storm! Otto in the 2004 AHS had four days since he died and his TCR came out. — Alastor Moody _{(T + C + U)} 02:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Depressions are definitely easy ones to write about as mentioned above. There isn't a lot to write about! CrazyC83 05:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hurricane John TCR

It's out. --Coredesat 18:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

No real surprises attached to it. CrazyC83 05:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hurricane Bud TCR

is out Good kitty 17:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Message to the National Hurricane Center: take a vacation! Please!...--Nilfanion (talk) 17:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

They're getting everything done so they can take a long vacation over Christmas. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 00:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Rosa TCR

[3] --Ajm⁸¹ 14:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Sergio TCR

[4] --Ajm⁸¹ 21:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Paul TCR

[5] I think this one's new. Good kitty 15:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Lane TCR

[6] --Ajm⁸¹ 21:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well that's 18 reports, just 7 more (Daniel, Emilia, Norman, Ioke, 2C, 3C, and 4C). Hmm why is it taking so long for Emilia's?Mitchazenia(8000+edits) 21:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:List of storms in the 2006 Pacific hurricane season/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Reference Daniel and the TDs, copyedit, expand the lead, and finish it off. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 14:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 20:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)