Talk:2000 Pacific hurricane season

Weather: Tropical / Eastern Pacific Mid‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific hurricane work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Todo

More pictures, maybe? We could have track maps for each storm. Jdorje 19:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

B-class?

I think B-class is too much for this article. It looks like is in developement stage. It looks more for a Start-class. juan andrés 02:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agreed, it doesn't even have every storm. I bumped it down to start. Hurricanehink 11:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I lowered it to a stub. It needs at least a one sentence description of every storm to be a start.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Storm Upana-Chanchu

None of the NHC, CPHC, JTWC or JMA mention that these two systems were a continuation of one another. I have found the information in Gary Padgett's summary and tracks for July 2000. Judging from the fact that a number of meteorologists believe that these two storms were the same system, the information can and probably should be in the sections in both this article and the typhoon season. However, as officially they are two distinct systems, the section here should be "TS Upana" and the section in the typhoon season "TS Chanchu", with the text describing the connection.--Nilfanion (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to IBTrACS:

WP122000, CHANCHU, 16,

20000726, 1200, , LO, 6.4N, 178.0W, 20, 1007, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000726, 1800, , TD, 6.9N, 178.2W, 25, 1007, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000727, 0000, , TD, 7.5N, 178.6W, 25, 1007, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000727, 0600, , LO, 8.0N, 179.8W, 20, 1006, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000727, 1200, , LO, 8.4N, 179.0E, 20, 1005, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000727, 1800, , LO, 8.7N, 178.0E, 20, 1004, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000728, 0000, , TD, 9.4N, 177.2E, 25, 1004, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000728, 0600, , TD, 10.1N, 176.6E, 25, 1000, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000728, 1200, , TD, 10.8N, 176.4E, 30, 1000, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000728, 1800, , TS, 11.5N, 176.2E, 35, 998, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000729, 0000, , TS, 12.2N, 176.0E, 40, 996, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000729, 0600, , TS, 13.1N, 175.9E, 40, 998, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000729, 1200, , TS, 13.8N, 176.1E, 35, 1000, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000729, 1800, , TD, 14.7N, 177.1E, 30, 1002, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000730, 0000, , LO, 15.5N, 177.8E, 25, 1004, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

20000730, 0600, , LO, 16.6N, 178.6E, 20, 1008, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999, -999,

ABC paulista (talk) 14:30, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.proteccioncivil.gob.mx/upLoad/Publicaciones/ised_2000.pdf
- In 2000 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-25 07:00:45, 404
- In 2000 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-10 05:44:07, 404

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

http://www.prh.noaa.gov/cphc/pages/hurrclimate.php#2000
- In 2000 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-05-25 07:00:45, 404 Not Found
- In 2000 Pacific hurricane season on 2011-06-10 05:44:26, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chanchu?

@ABC paulista:@Yellow Evan:@Jason Rees: There's a bit of an edit war going on over Chanchu, whether it was a TC in the EPAC. While the JTWC does include points east of the date line, that doesn't mean the system was a tropical depression in the EPAC.

To quote the JTWC:

WP, 12, 2000072612,   , BEST,   0,  64N, 1780W,  20,    0, TD
WP, 12, 2000072618,   , BEST,   0,  69N, 1782W,  25,    0, TD
WP, 12, 2000072700,   , BEST,   0,  75N, 1786W,  25,    0, TD
WP, 12, 2000072706,   , BEST,   0,  80N, 1798W,  20,    0, TD

In their ATCR for 2000, JTWC has a map of these exact points, indicating that TD refers to either tropical depression or disturbance, as Yellow Evan said. The same report says Chanchu did not form until July 28 (page 7) - 28 Jul - 29 Jul, which matches when they issued their first and last warning. The dates on July 26th and 27th match with their assessment for poor and fair chances of development, respectively. I'm going to remove Chanchu from this article unless someone can prove it was a TD in this basin. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: according to IBTrACS: