Talk:2019 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 1

Archive 1

Sources for April 4th predictions

The sources for the additions of the three April 4th projections seems to have some issues. I really don't understand how to fix them. -- Jordan 1972 (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Can we use AccuWeather as one of the hurricane season predictions?

Hurricane Noah removed AccuWeather from the forecasts and only said this stuff without further explanation. Do you think [we] Wikipedians could start using AccuWeather? 2602:306:8BB9:4E20:4DDB:E7BD:42C3:5F69 (talk) 07:50, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

My inclination is to say no as we can not cover every single forecast that is issued since the section would become bloated. I strongly feel that we should keep it to the national meteorological services of the various countries and the more notable ones that are mentioned in/by various sources (eg: CSU). I would also suggest that Accuweather is an example of the type of forecast we need to avoid adding in. This is because it opens up a can of worms about which media companies should be added in. For example should we add in The Weather Channel, Bernews or even your local media company like WHEC if they were to do seasonal forecasts.Jason Rees (talk) 13:54, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Valid concerns have been raised about the reliability of Accuweather. That is why we haven't used it in the past. Noah^Talk 17:05, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Sandbox for 02L/Future Barry

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/02L - I encourage any editors interested in writing on the current Gulf of Mexico disturbance to add to the sandbox. Advisories, and therefore tropical storm warnings, are likely to be issued today, and given the wording in the TWO, it could be a hurricane soon. Or, the system could fizzle, and the sandbox could just be a waste of time, but at least it's ready. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 11:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

And I published it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Wind is not updated on tropical storm barry

I tried to update the winds but it did not do it Meowmeow5550 (talk) 00:48, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Should we put invests on the other storms section

Just wondering HurricaneMichael2018 (talk) 16:59, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

no, as they are not tropical cyclones. There are too many invests each year that don’t develop. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 18:12, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2019

GreyTiger25 (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC) The winds are now at 65 I would like to change it to that

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DannyS712 (talk) 19:49, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Wiki

The track on Dorian is wrong it’s different from what’s on the National Hurricane Center than it was on here I need help putting in the correct image Procyclone25 (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Sources for April 4th predictions

The sources for the additions of the three April 4th projections seems to have some issues. I really don't understand how to fix. -- Jordan 1972 (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Ok Procyclone25 (talk) 15:37, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Forecasts

Please do not put forecasts for current storms. --Wyatt2049 | ^{(Talk) or (Stalk)} 11:56, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Summary Map is outdated

The summary map only shows tracks up to August 29. Does anyone know how to update the file? Ȝeſtikl (talk) 10:05, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2019

Include Miami is being pounded by tropical storm winds ImtheOneKhaled (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

 Not done It's not clear what changes you want to make. Please make a precise request and provide reliable sources if appropriate. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:37, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Articles of Tropical Storm Fernand and Hurricane Juliette

These storms have made landfall, so, I was wondering if anyone could make articles for those storms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.174.148.156 (talk) 22:47, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Juliette is not an Atlantic hurricane. Ȝeſtikl (talk) 00:49, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Does Fernand really need its own article? It really wasn't that important.Ȝeſtikl (talk) 00:49, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Neither of them do in my opinion. Even if Juliette is in EPAC, it still doesn’t need one. United States Man (talk) 03:24, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Should we really use the Bloomberg L.P. source for the damage totals for Dorian.

I'm currently affected by Hurricane Dorian, but that is not my point. I think that we shouldn't use an unofficial damage total from a company, in this case Bloomberg L.P.. I think we should wait for an official estimation in my opinion. Felicia (talk) 01:39, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Should we start adding "climatology" sections to annual hurricane season articles?

A lot of people on other weather forums tend to ask about the climatology behind hurricane seasons, in other words, "what made X year stronger / weaker than average?" and reference the fact that Wikipedia articles often mention that a season was exceptionally active or inactive, but fail to go into any detail about the conditions which gave rise to that fact. Some seasons include a brief mention of the teleconnections at the end of their lead section (2004's lead section, for example, makes brief reference to the development of a Modoki El Nino, which anomalously reduced wind shear across the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico) but no season's article goes into significant detail and many lack any kind of explanation at all - despite extensive annual reports from the NHC which could be referenced and go into great detail about the factors which came together and gave rise to the previous year's level of activity. For instance, the climatology report for the 2005 hurricane season references both the extremely warm sea temperatures in the tropical Atlantic and the anomalous subsidence near the International Date Line in the Pacific, which led to a dramatic reduction in Caribbean wind shear throughout that entire summer. The article on Wikipedia, on the other hand, merely states that "A number of storms that formed in 2005 exhibited unusual behavior and challenged forecasters' ability to make correct predictions."

Would there be any appetite for adding a climatology or "background" section to the template for hurricane seasons, so that people who are interested in the conditions giving rise to active or inactive seasons can find a summary and a link to sources on Wikipedia, as opposed to having to collate them through Google? Seems like the type of information Wikipedia would generally make an effort to include. 78.16.232.2 (talk) 14:09, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Usually such information goes into the seasonal forecasts section where reasons for activity or inactivity due to climatological factors are expounded on as part of the rationales for the forecasts made by various agencies. Such information can also be inserted in the season summary section should more details be necessary, like in 2015 Pacific hurricane season. Outside of this article, there is a section in Tropical cyclones in 2019 (pretty much any Tropical cyclones in year X article, actually) that invites elaboration on such climatological factors for any basin. For what it's worth, I think that these details do merit inclusion but I doubt one could find enough material to warrant an entire section or subsection unless it was record-breaking in some way. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 16:10, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

PTC 9

I am not sure if I should add PTC 9 to the season timeline or no. If you guys know the answer, please help me. DavidTheMeteorologist🌦❄️🌪 (talk) 6:35 A.M. EDT (10:35 UTC) September 13, 2019. —Preceding undated comment added 10:38, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

No, because they are not (yet) tropical cyclones. This is also why they shouldn't be added to the season effects table until they transition into a tropical depression/storm/etc. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 16:11, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

ACE is outdated

I need help because the ACE is outdated(last updated on September 10) and I dont know how to update this. Can someone please update this? - 9:37 September 14 (EDT) DavidTheMeteorologist🌦❄️🌪 (talk) 13:36, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Imelda vs. Jerry

Which should be listed first? Jerry technically formed (as TD Ten) before Imelda did, but on the other hand it seems weird to have J before I in what is otherwise an alphabetically ordered list. 63.231.154.58 (talk) 13:34, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Jerry would be first since it formed first, just like what you said. A similar occurrence happened on the 2012 Atlantic hurricane season, where Gordon and Helene are swapped due to the timing of their formation. INeedSupport ^:V 15:06, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Can someone create articles for Hurricane Humberto (2019) and Tropical Storm Imelda?

Anyone? Thanks, that'd be great. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:12, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Yeah I think they need articles now. Hurricane Humberto used to have an article, but someone deleted it. Maybe you can just redo the revision. Cheers, Username Goes Here 062805. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Username Goes Here 062805 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Recreated Hurricane Humberto (2019) page. Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Hmm it doesn't look like the article is ready yet since hasn't passed WP:GNG due to all citations being primary INeedSupport ^:V 23:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

The creation of the article is a bit premature, but it appears that Humberto will impact Bermuda soon enough, so we might as well keep it. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I certainly agree that it should not be deleted, but for now the article does not have enough citations to make Imelda Humberto notable for now. It may get moved to draft space if it still doesn't meet WP:GNG. INeedSupport ^:V 00:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good until the damage from Imelda is known. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:34, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

AGH I ACTUALLY MEAN HUMBERTO REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE INeedSupport ^:V 00:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

As to whether we should keep the Humberto article or keep it as a draft for now, I'm neutral. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:35, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I personally think it's premature, which shows when looking at the current article, although I have no doubt it'll fill in soon enough once Humberto starts affecting Bermuda. Master of Time (talk) 01:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm working on a draft of Tropical Storm Imelda right now, since it's bringing inundation to Texas and Louisiana. Here's the draft for you to help: Draft:Tropical Storm Imelda. INeedSupport ^:V 01:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Imelda will not need the year, unless there was an Imelda in another basin? CrazyC83 (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I’ve already requested my draft for deletion since there’s already an article about it (albeit it’s a redirect for now). To answer your question, It won’t need a year since it’s the only Atlantic storm with the name Imelda for now. I don’t think there was a storm named Imelda in another basin as far as I remembered. INeedSupport ^:V 19:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Imelda article

Can someone please make an Imelda article? It's one of the wettest tropical systems to ever hit the United States, and flooding in some areas has been described as worse than Harvey. Alex of Canada (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

It's already been created a while ago. INeedSupport ^:V 21:02, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Barry

Can someone add that Barry became the first hurricane of the season? Apparently editing is locked to certain people and i am not one of the people able to edit. ThatBluePit (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

• Why - To edit Semi-protected articles, it is required that you make an account, that you have been a Wikipedian for at least 4 days, and you have made at lease 10 edits.

MrCoolGuy159 (talk) 18:13, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Discrepancy in Dorian's Track

I've looked at the track shown for Hurricane Dorian and noticed the point that Dorian became a Category 2 it shows it became extratropical. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

@Cyclone of Foxes: That is not a discrepancy. Each dot shows a time where the NHC issues its main advisory for the system. Dorian did became extratropical with Category 2 winds at 5:00 PM AST (21:00 UTC), which the link can be found here. INeedSupport ^:V 19:33, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Why is this the case, though? It doesn't make sense, wouldn't it be easier for the intensity to represent the location. I mean each dot shows movement for every six hours after formation. Why is the intensity only reflect 0:00, 6:00, 12:00, and 18:00Z? Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 02:32, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Lorenzo

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Keep an eye out for Category 5 status with a potential record for eastern formation.

Is it possible for Lorenzo to have an article? It is one of the most intense and biggest hurricanes out in the Central Atlantic. Rmagnan (talk) 02:55, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose There's nothing that significant about Lorenzo, more importantly it hasn't impacted any land at all. Sure it's intense, but the Eastern Pacific has lots of Category 4 hurricanes that doesn't have articles. Plus, there's a lot of Category 5 hurricanes that formed in the Atlantic that was WAY STRONGER than Lorenzo. INeedSupport ^:V 02:57, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

As WPAC hurricanes are obviously stronger than Atlantic hurricanes due to the difference of both oceans, I don't understand your point. Comparing the two in that matter is just plain odd. And of course there are much stronger hurricanes in the Atlantic basin, when was that ever discussed? What's notable about this hurricane is how east it is compared with its intensity; in that regard it is record breaking and extremely unconventional. Making a thread right at this moment isn't necessary, but due to the agreement on the track affecting the Azores in around 5 days time and the significance of the system, a thread should be made soon. Sailwithme (talk) 03:48, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Switched to Support Holy crap it’s a Category 5. INeedSupport ^:V 02:30, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose for now As Lorenzo has not yet had any noticeable affects I would agree it is not significant enough for an article. However as many models do predict Lorenzo affecting the Azores it could be viable for an article in the future. Lorenzo's intensity is not especially notable as there have been stronger storms in the region it currently is in, notably Igor of 2010, and as it stands it is unlikely to become stronger than it. Dorian, as well, overshadows Lorenzo's intensity this year. We will see what happens later, but for now an article does not seem necessary. BananaIAm (talk) 03:06, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose for now: Simply being large and strong is not enough to have an article. It may have some impacts to Azores, but let's wait until there is impacts on land. --A1Cafel (talk) 04:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Changed to support as Lorenzo became a Cat 5 storm, also regarding to the Bourbon Rhode accident. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose - If you are a whale or a halibut you are probably terrified right now, as for humans though this has no effect. You can so far compare this to all of the Cat-4 Pacific Hurricanes we have had so far with no impacts. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:14, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Note - If this storm attains Category 5 status then it would most certainly become an article due to it being the most eastward Category 5 Hurricane to ever form. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Looks like Lorenzo is weakening. Oh well. INeedSupport ^:V 16:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Agree - Although I do understand it hasn’t affected land, it is a major hurricane. An estimated 99.3% of major hurricanes have an article on Wikipedia. I suggest we should start making an article out of a draft.

MrCoolGuy159 (talk) 18:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose for Now - Hurricane don't have any impact so no. Nearly Every storm whats makes landfall even as TD or TS have article, but something like:Barbara on Pacific or Hurricane Jerry on Atlantic, I will change that if its made landfall. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreiii3213 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Note - There is the Bourbon Rhode ship rescue ongoing right now which would need to be covered. An article will likely be warranted ultimately, but it's probably still premature. A draft would be good. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Agree - It has set quite a few records and peaked as a category 4 hurricane. (talk) 20:48, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• Weak Oppose - Generally, I don't think we should have articles for TCs that don't impact land or produce casualties, though an article would likely be warranted if Lorenzo impacts the Azores. It's a close one, I will admit, since Lorenzo is apparently the strongest hurricane on record for the eastern Atlantic. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

• This wouldn't be a criteria for List of Atlantic hurricane records though as its not the strongest on record in the Atlantic in terms of pressure or wind speed. The Atlantic ocean is a big place, I would make an article for an unusual location hurricane (South Atlantic, near Europe) before I make one about the strongest in x part. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:24, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose for now - Lorenzo hasn't impacted any areas as of right now despite being large and strong. It may get its own article if its impacts in the Azores are notable. We'll just wait and see. Sandy14156 :) 23:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose for now - Didn't cause much impact. The size could be pretty careless. But I wouldn't know what would happen next so it will be a oppose for now. Many tropical cyclones haven't got their articles yet due to its impact on areas and significance. Lorenzo may be a strong Category 4, but it isn't really what it's wind speed that's gonna help get the article. It's the impacts on the areas and cause of damage and fatalities. FB708 23:28, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:TOOSOON, as this hurricane has caused no damage or fatalities. No opposition to create an article for it once impacts happen. James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 00:57, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Support Well damn! 30 mph increase in 6 hours is... Wow... James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 03:19, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose for now - Lorenzo did not impact any land as a significant tropical cyclone, so no need for an article. The impacts on Cape Verde and Western Africa were minimal, but when it reaches the Azores or even Portugal and the UK, I completely agree with this. DavidTheMeteorologist🌦❄️🌪 7:38 a.m. September 28 (EDT)

Support- It's a high latitude Category 5 (I went on the nhc and thats what it said). I think thats enough to give it it's own article Infinitive01 (talk) 02:12, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

This aged pretty well given current situation. I now support an article because, regardless of land impacts, there has never been a hurricane this strong so far east in three decades. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 02:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Support - A category 5 hurricane, and in an unusual location, does warrant an article. Is this the farthest east we've seen a cat 5? TornadoLGS (talk) 02:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Support - This system is a Category 5 hurricane and it is the easternmost such storm. I think that a draft should be started since it is soon to be impacting the Azores and the British Isles, as a tropical and extratropical cyclone respectively. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 02:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support - Intensified into a Category 5. Never knew that a hurricane that strong could be (one of) the most eastern hurricanes. Could affect some areas later on. FB708 03:05, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What time zone to use for dates?

There's been back and forth on when Lorenzo became a Category 5 storm. IIRC, it was the 22:10 EDT, 23:10 ADT, 02:10 UTC update on September 28/29. I've seen some editors say that we have to use EDT because that's what NHC uses (though not consistently). I've seen other editors say that for things like this, we use UTC for basin-wide consistency. Is there a consensus on this? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 14:18, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

• I prefer UTC. As far as I can gather Lorenzo hasn't come anywhere near EDT, and UTC is comprehensible to a far wider spectrum of readers, including areas Lorenzo has impacted/is likely to impact. Daß Wölf 17:08, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
  • The general unwritten consensus from wikiproject Tropical Cyclones is to use UTC for all tropical cyclones regardless of basin.Jason Rees (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Updating Map

Can someone update the map it shows up to September 27 I think. Thanks! Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 18:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Lorenzo Map

Hi. i have question, why Lorenzo Track does not have any C5 color dot? its been C5 but the track shows something other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreiii3213 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

The category 5 intensity occurred at a non-synoptic point. The dots are given at 6-hour intervals issued at 00:00, 06:00, 12:00, and 18:00 UTC. Lorenzo was declared a category 5 in a special update at 02:10 and was also reflected in the 03:00 advisory. But for the synoptic points at 00:00 and 06:00 Lorenzo was at 135 kt, category 4. Though now I am confused as to why the advisories are offset from the synoptic points by 3 hours. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:55, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, everything you said is correct. I will add that the source for track maps comes from the NHC through the running best track file located here: NHC FTP server. And as mentioned running best tracks are in synoptic times. Unfortunately because the track program doesn't handle non-synoptic data, the category 5 point will not show. This doesn't mean that the track is inaccurate, it's a limitation of using points every 6 hours Supportstorm (talk) 21:40, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

In that case it may be a good idea to include an explanation in the caption as to why the category 5 peak does not appear on the map. Also, I take it the wind speed was fudged for Hurricane Michael since it also peaked at a non-synoptic point? TornadoLGS (talk) 21:53, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I'll add a note no problem. With Michael some users wanted to include it because it was so close to synoptic. So instead of the 18Z point the 17:30Z is added. I don't like making exceptions, but I also didn't want to get dragged into an edit war over it either. Supportstorm (talk) 22:57, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink:@Cyclonebiskit:@Jason Rees: Sorry to have to ping, but I feel this will become a bigger issue that will eventually need resolving and would like some input. Supportstorm (talk) 00:22, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

No worries about the ping. The question is a difficult one to answer as Data isnt always presented to us as neatly as we would like and I would imagine that you have to manipulate the timing of the data at times for the track maps. For example there are a few systems in the BoMs DB where a system was assessed at for arguments sake 18z, 23z and 06z or 00z, 03z, 06z, 09z and 12z. Now in that 3 hourly example let's say the system peaked at 03z but had moved over land and weakened by 06z. Which data point would you use? Does the data point at 03z override the 00z data point? Is it OR to have the trackmap showing that it peaked at C4 rather than C5? Jason Rees (talk) 01:23, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm not worried about the current map being OR. Everything in it is sourced and supported by an agency. In practice what I, and other track creators have done, is plot the maps each 6-hours given there is a source. But recently when enforcing that on systems that peaked in between the data points, example Andrew, Michael, Lorenzo, I have to regularly revert users who don't get what the data on the maps mean or want to keep the peak by replacing a sourced point with the peak winds. I get that they want to not mislead readers who view the map and question why the peak isn't there. But to force the intensity on sourced data that didn't support it makes it OR. Supportstorm (talk) 04:06, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

@Supportstorm: This is akin to what I mentioned with Andrew's track in our earlier discussion. The position is too far between synoptic points to be useable as a "replacement" in order to show the peak location. The upgrade to Category 5 was at 02:10z and kept for the 03:00z advisory. The 00:00z and 06:00z synoptic positions are 135 kt as is the 09:00z advisory. Not being able to clearly convey a non-synoptic position is a limitation of these largely automated maps. A similar action to Michael is needed here: a note on the track map explaining that the peak intensity is not shown due to its timing. We may need to find a way of remedying this in the future as tracks become more precise on timing. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 03:37, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

A note will be added when the track is finished. I agree that something may need to be done with tracks like these other than a band-aid solution we've been doing. Maybe some sort of project brainstorming session. Supportstorm (talk) 04:06, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Well in that case, if we want to accurately show intensity and keep positions as accurate as possible. What else could we do? Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 15:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Why don't we add the C5 point inserted between the period 00:00z and 06:00z. The 03:00z synoptic position will be noted as asynoptic and a special advisory.Bóng Ma ^{- Talk} 09:31, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Personally I am wondering if we should wait for the final tropical cyclone report on Lorenzo. It wouldn't surprise me if it was down-rated to Category 4 on that occasion, the central pressure cited was somewhat high for a Cat 5. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:41, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

925 is not at all atypical for Category 5 in this basin. Felix reached a substantially higher intensity with a pressure of 929 mb, Matthew reached Category 5 at 942 mb.--Jasper Deng (talk) 11:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

So, should we add the asynoptic point, or no? Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 00:40, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it would make sense to have the map agree with the information provided. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Is Nester even a storm yet?

So I looked at the page and it states that Nester became a storm. However I checked the NHC website and it states that it’s still an area of low pressure. Is it possible that it’s own research or a guess? Videogamerrocks (talk) 13:43, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

It appears to be a vandalism related edit that was undone. [1] - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Welp, nvm I guess... It’s PTC 16 right now (and how do I do it again without my nonsense happening? Can someone help me? BTW im videogamerrocks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Videogamerrocks (talk • contribs) 22:57, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Olga or Pablo?

Whoever is doing this is goin too crazy cuz the fact that it’s about Olga but shows Pablo pictures and wind speeds is getting real confusing. And the fact I can’t even edit without help... Videogamerrocks (talk) 03:19, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

How many systems is considered a hyperactive season?

Just curious Tabbywabby7738 (talk) 01:50, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I think it’s over 12. But it’s more active then last year in terms of names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Videogamerrocks (talk • contribs) 03:16, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Whether a season is hyperactive takes int account the number of named storms, number of hurricanes, number of major hurricanes, and accumulated cyclone energy. TornadoLGS (talk) 05:06, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

What was the northern most hurricane?

I was wondering because Pablo was pretty far north Tabbywabby7738 (talk) 03:31, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Faith of 1966 beats out Pablo for the northernmost hurricane on record by quite a bit. However Pablo did break the record for the easternmost hurricane, beating Vince of 2005. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BananaIAm (talk • contribs) 03:57, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Hurricane Pablo

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I think Hurricane Pablo should be split into another page for forming in an unusual location. MrCoolGuy159 (talk) 01:55, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

References

Support

1. This suggestion seems reasonable. Hurricane Pablo has formed under quite unusual conditions, reached Category 1 very late in the 2019 Atlantic Hurricane season (late October), and has broken the previous record by Hurricane Vince (2005) as the most eastern formed hurricane. All these reasons support creating an article for Hurricane Pablo.Valaratar (talk) 09:39, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
2. Support, Many storms have gotten articles solely for their records, even if they're fish storms or have minimal impacts. For example, Lorenzo of this year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BananaIAm (talk • contribs) 16:20, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
   • Yes, but this goes into WP:OSE. Lorenzo became a category 5 hurricane which generated plenty of interest, it also impacted more areas due to it's size and high intensity. Not all cyclones fall under one umbrella as each one is a very different storm. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:41, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
   • Furthermore, Lorenzo killed at least 4 sailors, and 7 are still missing, in the sinking of the Bourbon Rhodes and hit the British Isles as an extra-tropical storm! Pierre cb (talk) 16:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
   • Pablo also got a stronger wind speed and pressure than Vince (80mph,977mbar respectively) . 86.180.2.118 (talk) 17:43, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
3. Support, First of all, this formed in October. Second of all, it became a hurricane at 18.3 W, the farthest east in recorded history. All while thriving in cool October waters. Not only that, but Pablo was stronger then Vince (see the 86.180.2.118 guy). I don't want to say that Hurricane Vince doesn't deserve an article, because it does. But if Vince deserves an article, so does Pablo. - Hurricanehuron33—Preceding undated comment added 10:23, 29 October 2019
   • Not even close to comparable. Vince made landfall on the Iberian Peninsula. That by itself is so exceptionally rare as to warrant the article. Master of Time (talk) 01:47, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
4. Support. Considering that neither Tropical Storm Zeta nor Hurricane Epsilon even approached land giving Pablo an article (since Pablo did pose a threat to the Azores at one point and broke a record, as well as being a small hurricane in terms of size) doesn't seem unreasonable. If Tropical Storm Zeta, which was less intense, broke no records, killed no people, and never affected land, gets an article, then giving an article to Pablo shouldn't be that controversial. WhittleMario (talk) 15:31, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Oppose

1. No, this is a fish storm which has had no major impact to land or people. The location is unusual, but we cant base an entire article on that. I also want to add that Vince is unique as it hit mainland Europe gathering attention from academics. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
2. I agree with Knowledgekid, Pablo may have formed at an unusual location, but it has otherwise no significant impact on land. If Pablo hit land, similarly to Vince, that would be different. Also, last year Leslie hit the Iberian after becoming extratropical, so the damage it caused was enough to let it have a separate article. I just feel there is to little about Pablo to make it another page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMT615 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
3. This an insignifiant storm that caused no damages. What can be said about it more than what is already in the text of its section? Furthermore, read Hurricane Vince (2005) that says: "Although Hurricane Vince developed in an unusual location in the northeastern Atlantic, well away from where tropical cyclones are usually found, it is neither the northernmost forming nor the easternmost forming Atlantic tropical cyclone; these records are held by an unnamed tropical storm of the 1952 season at 42.0° N, and Christine of the 1973 season at 14.0° W, respectively.". So the supposed record of Pablo seems doubtful. Pierre cb (talk) 16:39, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

   @Pierre cb: How so? Christine in 1973 remains the easternmost forming tropical cyclone, however, Christine never attained hurricane status unlike Vince in 2005 at 18.9° W and Pablo at 18.3° W (which is why Pablo surpassed Vince and now holds the record). CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:47, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

4. Start by adding all of the info on the storm in the season section. It's barely a paragraph right now. Considering it didn't hit land, I doubt there is much more info that can be added in a separate article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
5. There is certainly no insignificance to the system in the sense of its record, and there are other articles on weaker systems (Imelda 2019) and other systems with little effect on land and damage, (not the best example, but the 2018 Pacific season's Hector is one that is similar) but unless there is much more information to add, the article probably will not be long. If there is a decent amount more information to add, perhaps there is a case, but a short-lived system with negligible impact on land doesn't stand a great chance for being that long, record-setting or not. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:19, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
6. Pablo is only notable for being the eastern-most hurricane on record. That's it. That's clearly not enough to warrant a separate article for Pablo. This discussion is similar to Tropical Storm Arlene (2017) discussion, where consensus was to not make an article about Arlene, even though it's the first April tropical cyclone since 2003. INeedSupport ^:V 20:22, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
7. Oppose Not really notable and any article would be extremely short. This information could easily be included in its entirety within the season section. Noah^Talk 21:27, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
8. Pablo's status as the easternmost-forming hurricane on record is notable, but yet that is a statistic that can be covered with ease in the storm's subsection. This is especially true considering the storm's mundane, short-lived track, as well as its minimal impact to land. 🌧❄ϟ TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 22:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
9. While this cyclone's notability falls within its unclimatological characteristics and nature, little, if any, land impact occurred with Pablo and much of what stand out about it can be covered in the storm section on the season article with ease. In my honest opinion, there is simply not enough to warrant a separate article, and any article written would likely be quite short. Cooper 23:06, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
10. Merely breaking records is not sufficient unless there is significant coverage on the topic. For a short-lived storm which had little impact, this is unlikely to exist, and there's no reason to create a separate stub page when this can be properly covered here (splitting could be used if the section here becomes too large - however, as others have pointed out, considering it currently has only one paragraph, that is clearly not the case). 107.190.33.254 (talk) 23:34, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
11. Except for breaking the record for the easternmost hurricane, it isn't all that notable since it didn't have that much impact on any landmasses. Since there is only a paragraph in Pablo's bio and it doesn't have that much information, the article will be relatively short. Not all storms that break records have their own articles, in short. Sandy14156 :) 02:46, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
12. Record of the easternmost hurricane is not important enough to have an article. --219.79.97.58 (talk) 03:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
13. Simply breaking the record of easternmost hurricane is not a rationale to create an article for Pablo. The system may cause some impacts to Azores, but still not enough to deserve an article. --A1Cafel (talk) 07:16, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
14. Pablo is an oddball of a storm, but the record that it broke is of little note. Since it was a short-lived tropical cyclone with no real impacts there isn't really much to say about it compared to other storms. TornadoLGS (talk) 20:40, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
15. A short-lived storm that happened to break a record. I suppose every storm breaks a record if you get specific enough (e.g. "most intense storm on a long weekend north of the 45th"). Not an especially notable record or storm. DOSGuy (talk) 01:35, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Outdated summary map

The summary map is not updated to show all of Hurricane Pablo's path. WhittleMario (talk) 17:18, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@WhittleMario: It will get updated soon. Just remember that we are all volunteers here and we do need some breaks from time to time. INeedSupport ^:V 20:22, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:39, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Hyperactive?

This season appears to be about to beat 2017 by td's and ts's Tabbywabby7738 (talk) 17:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@HurricaneMichael2018: Nope. It's not even close to becoming hyperactive. It needs to have an accumulated cyclone energy exceeding 153 in order to be classified as hyperactive. Right now, this season only has 123. INeedSupport ^:V 17:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Tropical storm melissa

I think that melissa may be eligible for an article, as it formed almost directly from a nor'easter, disproved multiple forecasts, and caused disruption along the Northeast. But it's just a suggestion. - Hurricanehuron33, 29 October 2019 —Preceding undated comment added 10:46, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Melissa just had minor impacts on land, and being a nor'easteris not a reason for an individual article. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:08, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Oof. Okay, it's fine! Hurricanehuron33 (talk) 22:57, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 Atlantic hurricane season ending

With the dissipation of Tropical Storm Rebekah in November 1, 2019, the 2019 Atlantic hurricane season is currently dormant, and has probably ended by now. It had its fair share of major hurricanes (Dorian, Humberto, and Lorenzo)

• First storm: Andrea - Subtropical storm
  • First hurricane: Barry - Category 1
    • Major: Dorian - Category 5 (record for wind speed)
• Last storm: Rebekah - Tropical storm
  • Last hurricane: Pablo - Category 1
    • Major: Lorenzo - Category 5 (record for easternmost)

MrCoolGuy159 (talk) 14:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

And your point is? I don't mean to be rude, but please keep in mind that this talk page is WP:NOTAFORUM and you should only discuss changes you intend to make on the article itself. CycloneYoris ^talk! 15:35, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@MrCoolGuy159: It is currently dormant, but I don't think we as Wikipedians should declare it over before its official end. At 23:59 HST 30 November 2019, sure, but not now. Besides, it will be slightly less work not to declare it over now, as the chance of a tropical cyclone occurring after then in the Atlantic is much less than after now. Grant Exploit (talk) 15:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Bias in the amount of storms

Is this the first year in which Subtropical storms are officially named? If this is the new normal then the "hyperactivity" can be explained in part due to this change. The total number of traditionally named storms would be 16 (which is still high), not 18. Should we count sub-tropical storms going forward and explain somewhere why the sudden increase? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

No, 2018 Atlantic hurricane season also saw a number of subtropical storms ... which all eventually became tropical storms. According to Subtropical cyclone NHC began flagging them in 2002. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Nope. Subtropical storms were first named back in 2002 (as Jo Jo Eumerus correctly points out). CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:23, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Ranking in number of named storms

Hello, I see my edit has been undone, with message "Makes no sense".

The following seasons are ahead of 2019 in number of nameable storms: 1887, 1933, 1969, 1995, 2005, 2010, 2011, 2012

Therefore, the current ranking is ninth, not fifth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.94.131.242 (talk) 17:26, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

2019 has 17 named storms behind seasons with 18, 19, 20, and 28. The sentence says fifth-most named storms, which is correct since 17 is the fifth highest number. But you would be correct to say tied for ninth-most active season in terms of named storms. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 08:19, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

I also want to point out that all storms before the satellite era should be taken with a grain of salt. There were less reliable ways of recording storms back then making some of these old records up for debate. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:41, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Already noted but 2019 upped to 18 named storms with Sebastien in late November.

~ AC5230 (talk) 00:18, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2020

can i edit the hurricane dorian article 2601:2C5:C180:9F80:B4D2:255E:A9ED:1418 (talk) 21:21, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page 2019 Atlantic hurricane season. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. AntiCedros (talk) 21:40, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I personally think Tropical Storm Nestor deserves its own article.

Tropical Storm Nestor wasn’t a particularly special nor strong storm, however, it caused considerable damage on the Florida Panhandle with the amount of tornadoes and rainfall it brought to the area in the period of 2 days. Another storm, Fernand, has its own article for its landfall in Mexico, and frankly, isn’t that much different. What do you guys think? Hurricaneboy23 16:26, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Each storm is different and they routinely pass through that part of the world. I mean I would take it to draft first to see if you can expand upon what is already in this article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

A draft could be set Hurricaneboy23 16:42, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

I’m going to also add that Humberto only dealt a mere 1 million in damage and has an article, yet Nestor dealt more than 150 million. Hurricaneboy23 17:01, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

You should also read WP:OSE, each storm is different in the effects they cause. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:03, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Nestor spawned a tornado outbreak and affected a large part of the southeastern United States (Even if it was an extratropical cyclone at the time of worst impacts). I'm OK with Nestor getting an article (and Olga too by the same logic). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Here’s my draft so far: Draft:Tropical Storm Nestor Hurricaneboy23 21:22, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Support

1. $150 million in damage seems notable enough. While this likely falls under WP:OSE, I'd also like to note that virtually every landfalling Atlantic tropical cyclone gets an article, to the point that it's effectively a de facto policy. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:31, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
2. Even though there's already an article out for Nestor, I honestly agree that Nestor should have an article, since it caused quite a bit of damage to the US. Three fatalities also occurred. There's enough information about Nestor to warrant an article for Nestor. INeedSupport ^:V 18:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Nestor did not do enough damage to have an article.
2. In retrospect, half of the sources used in the split off article are routine weather reports. The other half describe the damage caused by the storm, but this is already nicely summarized in this article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:18, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Pablo article

This is the question I would like to know: HOW MUCH DAMAGE DID SUBTROPICAL CYCLONE KATIE DO? Answer: None! So why does it have an article and Pablo doesn't? I mean, now Tropical Storm Olga, which only lasted 1 DAY, has an article. Why can't someone create an article titled Hurricane Pablo (2019)? It's probably not going to hurt you! 🐔Chicdat (talk) 10:25, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Few points. 1) No article is going to hurt you. 2) WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS 3) There was an earlier discussion on Pablo. The storm didn’t affect land. Olga caused $400M in damage. The reason we have articles is to reflect why these storms are important. Pablo was the easternmost hurricane on record, sure, but what more can be said about the storm than what is in the section in the season article? As for Katie, it was a meteorological anomaly that formed in an unusual part of the world, and it wasn’t properly classified as a TC/SC, so it needs a bit more explanation. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay. 🐔Chicdat (talk) 10:29, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2020

The introduction says "to the same area affected by Hurricane Michael" Please change this to "to the area affected by Hurricane Michael" because "same" is wordy and doesn't contribute to the sentence at all. It fits with "as" ("it hit the same area as H.M. did the year before") but doesn't work without it. 96.75.222.117 (talk) 23:17, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Also, please change "became one of the seven seasons to feature" to "became one of seven seasons to feature" because "the" doesn't make sense here. 96.75.222.117 (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Actually, that sentence including that word "the" in there (...became one of THE seven seasons to feature...) would slightly make sense since I added that word in there. I may have to re-add that word back in that sentence. --Allen ^{(talk / ctrb)} 17:05, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Good article nomination

This page was recently nominated as a good article. Given that the nominator, Chicdat is a fairly new editor with few edits to this article (but is clearly enthusiastic), and that the guidelines provide that "[n]ominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination", I thought it would make sense to open a discussion here to ensure the article is ready for such a review. Pinging significant contributors (those in the top 10 of number of edits or characters added): @TropicalAnalystwx13, CooperScience, KN2731, LightandDark2000, 12george1, DavidTheMeteorologist, MarioProtIV, Drewsky1211, AHeneen, Keith Edkins, CycloneYoris, Purplemountainman, Wyatt2049, and FleurDeOdile:. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Usernameunique (talk · contribs)! 🐔Chicdat ^ChickenDatabase 19:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi (again!). This article is not ready for a good article nomination. Numerous sentences lack a citation, several storms such as Dorian--the biggest of the season--completely lack impact information, and the National Hurricane Center is still in the process of finalizing their post-season analysis of the systems. Chicdat I would ask that you withdraw this nomination for the time being. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 19:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for weighing in, TropicalAnalystwx13. Chicdat, based on that, I'm going to remove the nomination template for now. If you're still interested in working on the article, however, the parts TropicalAnalystwx13 pointed to would be good places to begin. One thing to keep in mind for starting work on good articles is that it can help to start small; the first good articles I nominated were pretty short (e.g., Guilden Morden boar), but they helped me figure out the framework to use with the longer ones (e.g., Benty Grange helmet). A good analogy here might be to working on and nominating an article about a smaller storm before nominating big articles about many storms. Cheers, --Usernameunique (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey Usernameunique, just following up here. The National Hurricane Center finished their post-season analyses, and the article has been revamped accordingly if you're still interested in reviewing this. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 23:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, 12george1 (talk · contribs) has nominated it already, and I'm sure he wants you to make it (close to) the 1000th GA in WPTC. 🐔Chicdat ^ChickenDatabase 10:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

2021 retirement verses 2020

If not already in there, can it be added? I think it is important. 67.81.198.147 (talk) 19:51, 17 May 2020

It's already mentioned in the storm names section. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Hurricane Jerry article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

{{Do you think we need an article for Hurricane Jerry of 2019? Hurricane Jerry was a strong Category 2 Atlantic hurricane and impacted some islands and Bermuda before it dissipated on September 24. Parts of its storm track looked similar to Hurricane Jose (2017). Also, Hurricane Jerry had slighty high pressure. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 21:09, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

• Sorry, but it caused no damage nor deaths. Not notable. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:12, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
• @Seventyfiveyears: it doesn't really need one. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:14, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

• Reminder that consensus isn't determined by votes: WP:NOTAVOTE. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 23:23, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

• It was pretty much a fish storm. Not a notable cyclone. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
• Not notable, it barely affected land. Can someone please close this? 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 13:30, 23 November 2020 (UTC)}}

Neutral

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lorenzo's track

as i been reading the article i noticed that Lorenzo and the tracks of the whole year altogether have not been updated to include Lorenzo's Category 5 peak despite its infobox and article saying so. is there a reason behind this or was this a mistake? HavocPlayz (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:42, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

@HavocPlayz: the track map shows Lorenzo's intensity at six-hour intervals, i.e. 00:00, 06:00, 12:00, and 18:00 UTC. Lorenzo only strengthened to a Category 5 hurricane at 03:00 UTC on September 29 and weakened to Category 4 by 06:00 UTC, so there's no Category 5 point on the track map. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 13:36, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

makes sense, thx HavocPlayz (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:10, 15 November 2021 (UTC)