Talk:2012 Pacific typhoon season/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Pakhar

The description of Pakhar is now so big. As it may cause significant damage in Vietnam, we should create an article for Pakhar. -- Meow 04:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, given that it's the first storm of the year, and it clearly isn't making the season article too long, I don't think it's absolutely mandatory. However, someone can probably do it if they feel like it, particularly once we find out what it'll do in Vietnam. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

ACE

I was wondering, why do we have ACE for WPAC storms? JMA uses 10-min, which means comparing with ACE in the EPAC or ATL would be total impractical since NHC uses 1-min. Furthermore, I see no evidence that the JMA even uses ACE. So why do we? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:01, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I support Hurricanehink, it is truely irrelevant to have ACE here. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 08:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Citation needed

All subsections in 2012 Pacific typhoon season#Storms are factual information about the development of the tropical cyclones. Hence they should have sources such as reports issued by any national meteorological organisation in English or any Asian language. Why do the majority of them have no citation at all?--Quest for Truth (talk) 11:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

JTWC Prog reasonings

Can we start archiving the JTWC Prognostic reasoning's as well as the advisories please, as the Prognostic reasoning's are more useful these days than the JTWC advisory.Jason Rees (talk) 15:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Is there an archive that has them online? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

More recent ones can be found here. Otherwise id suggest a look through the NRL archives, since they archive all the JTWC advisories.Jason Rees (talk) 17:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm on it--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 18:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks :).Jason Rees (talk) 20:39, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Earth100 & User:Jpuligan 12

I cannot tolerate both of them anymore. They just always provide wrong information, grammars and nonsense. If they keep editing on Wikipedia, they will really ruin many articles like 2012 Pacific typhoon season or Typhoon Vicente (2012). User:Earth100 and User:Jpuligan 12, please stop destroying. -- Meow 14:25, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I never could stand Earth100, i'm glad that I don't run into him much anymore. United States Man (talk) 02:20, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Should 2012 Pacific typhoon season be deleted?

User:Cyclonebiskit has quoted many paragraphs that do not cite, and this user uses some rude words like ‘fucking’. -- Meow 19:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

It shouldnt be deleted but reworked.Jason Rees (talk) 19:12, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

It should not be deleted but the users that frequently edit this page need to learn to correctly cite their sources when adding information. I understand Cyclonebiskit's frustration. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 19:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

How about other past seasons? Besides, most of information I provided is just from the JMA and the JTWC. Cyclonebiskit’s thinking may be good, but this person’s attitude makes me so disappointed. The Wikipedia version of the Reign of Terror is happening. -- Meow 19:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I will be having words with Cyclonebiskit about his swearing, but i do not think any PTS articles should be deleted. I just think we need more decent editors to help out with the seasons.Jason Rees (talk) 19:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, I really agree with CB here. I am also tired of having sections without sources. Wikipedia isn't censored. Let me quote from WP:ES.

It is good practice to fill in the Edit summary field, or add to it in the case of section editing, as this helps others to understand the intention of your edit.

CB's cursing was emphasizing his anger. I see no problems with it. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

^ Cursing was merely to express how frustrated I am, especially after having spoken of this before. Sorry if it offended anyone but that's life, sometimes you hear things that you don't want to. Either way, whoever is adding all this un-sourced material needs to stop immediately. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:45, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

CB was not doing anything wrong; he was just angry, that people were adding unsourced information. Give him a break. And I strongly oppose deleting this article, it is notable. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 20:55, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree that Cyclonebiskit did nothing wrong. Although I wouldn't support that he keep swearing, I don't think that it is worth causing a big uproar about it. And, Meow, I can't believe that you would be foolish enough to propose that this article be deleted. United States Man (talk) 02:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

If one article is confirmed as bad as that, I will be forced to purpose. -- Meow 04:22, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Just now User:Yellow Evan did the same thing. If someone has much time on quoting them, why not take a little more time on finding some sources? I really spent much time on Vicente. -- Meow 01:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

You have a very good point, but I am not familiar with WPAC sources. For the record, it too me very little time adding them back in. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 01:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Meow - the CN Span tags are being added because the article hasnt been sourced up as you have been going along, there is no point in moaning at us about it as we will try and help clean this page up if we are treated nicely.Jason Rees (talk) 14:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

You guys treated me badly. I gave many suggestions, but people never accepted. -- Meow 18:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I personally havent, ive been trying to support you in parts.Jason Rees (talk) 19:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Other storms?

That tropical depression should belong to the 2011 Pacific typhoon season. -- Meow 18:53, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I dont see why it cant be in both since it was active on January 1.Jason Rees (talk) 19:00, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

That system formed on December 31, 2011. If this is included, Tropical Storm Zeta should be also included in the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season. -- Meow 19:04, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Zeta is mentioned to an appropriate level within the 2006 AHS though.Jason Rees (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, the depression's mention in the Other storm section is appropriate. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

The number of tropical depressions

Some people keep claiming that the tropical depression which formed on 31 Dec 2011 and dissipated on 1 Jan 2012 should be included in this article, in terms of the section and the numbers. Please take the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season as an example— it just briefly mentions Tropical Storm Zeta, but the article does not include Zeta as a section and the numbers. Simplifying the TD on 13 January and the TD on 9 August is also a really bad idea, as that is not fair for those two systems. -- Meow 01:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Per the consensus reached on the previous discussion the tropical depression should stay in the article and count for the season. As for Other Storms section, it is better to have the section to cover minor tropical depressions that are not covered that well, did not reach tropical storm status or were generally not significant as we dont want this article to be too long.Jason Rees (talk) 02:00, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

What discussion? Your own discussion? If the Atlantic article is not like that, why should this article be that? That is not reasonable. -- Meow 02:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

The discussion i refereed to was the one that you initiated back on July 29, on this very page. As for your point about the Atlantic, it is reasonable to have an other storms section in the PTS and not in the Atlantic since we cover more tropical depressions than in the Atlantic.Jason Rees (talk) 02:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

The ‘strongest storm’ issue again

Bolaven is currently a large typhoon with weaker winds (95 knots); Guchol was a small typhoon with stronger winds (100 knots). Which is the ‘strongest storm’, Bolaven or Guchol? -- Meow 14:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it is by pressure, not winds. In that case, it would be Bolaven. Kiewii (T|C) 15:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

It is indeed by pressure and obviously Bolaven wins since it got down to 910 as opposed to 945 hPa.Jason Rees (talk) 12:53, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Should the affected areas "Hong Kong" and "Macau" be added to the table "Kai-tak" of season effects?

I'm not satisfied with the explanation of not adding Hong Kong and Macau to the area of Kai-Tak of the "areas affected". The reason is Hong Kong and Macau are included in China. This is true but if it is, why we can see Hong Kong and Macau placed in Vincente, Talim and Doksuri? Talim only makes these two places to hoist the no. 3 typhoon signal while Kai-Tak makes these two places to hoist no. 8 typhoon signal. That doesn't make sense! I think we should add these two affected places: "Hong Kong" and "Macau" back to the area of Kai-Tak of the "areas affected". If no, please give me a lengthy explanation. --Wildoneshelper (talk) 07:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

What are you waiting for..? :P --Anirudh Emani (talk) 10:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I would prefer to remove all instances of Hong Kong and Macau since the areas affected chart is only meant for broad areas, so that we can keep it tidy and the page size down. Since Hong Kong and Macau are just cities in China that just happened to belong to different countries before 1997 and 1999.Jason Rees (talk) 16:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, Hong Kong and Maccau are not cities that belong in China. They are separate territories that are now controlled by China. Hong Kong has a different set of rules that dont match those of China. So, yeah.. I think the territories need to be mentioned separately. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 16:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

My opinion is that SARs are not normal cities. They have sort-of "independent" government and rules are not the same as the real country. Therefore, I think we should add Hong Kong and Macau as these two cities have different warning systems and we have to be specific. That's why, I think adding the cities which is "directly" affected would be good too! Wildoneshelper (talk) 03:55, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I dont think we should mention cities because to be frank there are too many, however that being said i wouldn't mind seeing Eastern China or Southern China etc.Jason Rees (talk) 14:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

International names and numbering

Why are we even mentioning the storm number in the International names section..? Its only obvious that the storms are numbered sequentially and the International name is given to every numbered storm..! I guess only the Phillipine names section needs numbers. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 14:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know, its so that readers can easily correlate the JMA name with the PAGASA name — Ines(talk) 17:07, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Unlike other RSMCs, the JMA always uses numbers and names together. Also, you should think about few storms from the Central Pacific such as Ioke, which is given the number 0612 but not named by the JMA. They are the reasons why we should mention numbers. -- Meow 18:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Referencing

If you are going to add stuff in about a system, please remember to cite it.Jason Rees (talk) 15:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Some tropical depressions should not be merged

Although some tropical depressions are not upgraded by the JTWC, they actually reached 30 knots 10-min maximum sustained winds according to the JMA. Thus, they should not be merged into Other storms. -- Meow 05:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Especially storms which undergo unusual features, or events, such as:

• Systems which crossed the international date line
• Systems which interacted, or were part of a Fujiwara effect
• Forming in areas where most systems will not develop
• Making landfall
• Forming overland

Besides, readers would not like to watch a hunk of words with no other data, such as tracks and images.Also there should be discussions on whether of not to add the tracks an images to the other storm section's TDs.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉^Talk_Contribs 11:10, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Earth 100, im pretty sure they wouldn't care about having a hunk of words with no other data however, i am looking at adding in a single trackmap of all the systems that get thrown into other storms. As for infoboxes, pictures and tracks i strongly oppose adding them as not every tropical depression needs a single section, which is what you are proposing Earth100. Also i would like you to bear in mind the reason why i am moving these depressions and that is to try and control the page size because we are at 110 kb which according to Wikipedia:Article size means that we should desperately looking at splitting this page up further. As for moving systems that the JMA thinks are significant because they had 10-minute sustained windspeed of 30 kts, i still think if there isnt that much to say about them then i think they should be moved to other storms.Jason Rees (talk) 14:08, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

What JR said. Most JMA TD's don't do much but spin some fish, and a section called "JMA depressions" or "Other storms" is fine IMO. As for the issue on huge chuncks of data, we can add images to break it up. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 15:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Fine, as for now keep the really weak storms in the other storms bin.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉^Talk_Contribs 02:52, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

One its not a bin, its just an area which we can keep tropical depressions that dont do anything in. Two - i am not going to limit it to the "really weak storms" as i know that once we remove the Original research from the article that they are only going to be a few sentences long, which doesn't do our readers any favours.Jason Rees (talk) 21:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Current information of a typhoon

Recently, I sometimes see some current status of some tropical cyclones have missed out the location. I think giving the coordinates are not enough, as not everybody can have an instant map (even some may not have latitudes or longitudes) and take a look on where it is. Therefore, adding the distance between a city could help. This has applied to many weather stations and I think none of them will only give coordinates. If it happens JTWC site is down, I think taking a look on HKO or KMA will help. Any questions?

Wildoneshelper (talk) 09:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

HKO's coordinates do show the storm where it was many hours ago, and it's not real time. It's not a good idea to use HKO's coordinates of a storm.

I think we must provide the distance between the storm and the city, so that we will not waste time in checking coordinates. Leaving it blank is not a good idea. 203.218.196.113 (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Gaemi

Should an article of Gaemi should be made? it made landfall over it's birthplace-Vietnam...if so, the article will be created within 24 hours.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉^Talk_Contribs 10:30, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Hold of on it for now, plus i would like to see a reference for its birthplace being Vietnam.Jason Rees (talk) 10:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, i have decided not to create the article. Anyone besides me, are free to do so.-- ✯Earth100✯ ☉‿☉^Talk_Contribs 13:03, 8 October 2012 (UTC)