Jump to content

Talk:List of retired Philippine typhoon names

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Revamp

[edit]

I have today revamped this article to maintain consistency with other retired TC name articles and remove the original research that was present in the article. This has led to me commenting out several systems that may well of had their name retired but i have no source to prove it. If you happen to find a source in the future please feel free to add the names back in or add the source to this talkpage. Thankyou.Jason Rees (talk) 19:48, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the r in 'Retired' capitalized? Bruvtakesover (T|C) 19:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This seems like a good time to remind people that we need something to say that a name is retired before we can add it in. Just because PAGASA removed the name Juan from the list and replaced it with Jose it doesnt mean that Juan was retired as PAGASA could have removed the name for the sake of it.Jason Rees (talk) 16:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The media does not retire names, pagasa does, this is the reason pagasa replace cosme and juan. first and foremost, yes indeed cosme and juan were retired as pagasa said: once the typhoon cause at least PHP 1 billion or 300 deaths, it will automatically be retired, this is the reason cosme was replaced by carina and juan with jose PAGASA is my source not any media.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.158.249 (talk) 06:25, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually just because something meets the criteria, it doesnt mean that it is automatically retired, as you never know they could have been just removed from the list. Until a source is provided that proves that Cosme and Juan were actually retired, and not just removed from the lists we can not add them in. As for the media retiring names, i realise that they dont retire names, but we still need a source that states that the names have been retired and not just removed.Jason Rees (talk) 12:19, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on the side of the IP here to be honest.... I highly doubt that PAGASA would remove names of storms that met the retirement criteria "just because" and out of coincidence. If you want to be stubborn on this, please send PAGASA an email asking them what names have been retired since they began naming storms. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Its still OR though, as at the end of the day they could have removed them for watever reason like they did back in 1979, 1985 and 2001. I am not about to send PAGASA an email asking them for a list of retired names, since i would not be able to cite it and we would be no further forward.Jason Rees (talk) 18:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New PAGASA categories

[edit]

@Jason Rees: since there are new PAGASA typhoon categories, we need to make some changes and to decide. Since PAGASA had put up 2 new categories (STS + STY), do we put it in our future storms which reach this categories or do we apply to all storms in the table? I actually like both, as in adding the 2 new categories in the tables and adding them in future storms. Your choice Jason because you are good organizing stuff. Typhoon2013 (talk) 05:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We have no option but to apply it to both past and future systems, fortunately though its quite a simple change with us just adding the word Severe to Tropical Storms >50kts.Jason Rees (talk) 10:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but I only just see this message. Ok, but according to the winds of Juaning (Nock-ten, 2011), it is a STS right? Typhoon2013 (talk) 21:22, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have RV'd the edit that removed the classifications of it being a Severe Tropical Storm.Jason Rees (talk) 23:19, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason Rees: Sorry but only just seen your latest message. Since I made a fixing-ups on the "new" PAGASA category (as in the updated one), I went here to confirm it. Why not a Severe Tropical Storm, even though it's a new PAGASA category? Typhoon2013 (talk) 05:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Typhoon2013: Have a read of my comments above before pinging me and asking me virtually the same question as before. I feel that we should use the STS category, someone else doesnt.Jason Rees (talk) 07:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: Ok thanks. But I made an edit in the article a while ago today and was it good and right? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Older retirements

[edit]

So I had nothing else to do today, so I finished Typhoon Ruby (1988), and the article previously stated that PAGASA retired its name. However, that tidbit was unsourced. I go to this article to find a source, and guess what? That source is a blog from some average Joe. Unless there's a listing of PAGASA's retired names in one place somewhere that I am not aware of, this is a textbook case of WP:OR, and thus should be removed (along with what appears to be most of pre-1998 systems on this list) despite the fact the storm clearly met modern day 21st century retirement requirements. I should note on the side that it is odd this never has stumbled on me before, as both my previous GA's of retired Philippines typhoons like this I missourced the retirement in one instance, and another instance, never even mentioned it was retired. But back on topic, what should be done? YE Pacific Hurricane 05:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@YE: 4 years on and we now have a list of retired names from PAGASA, which includes Ruby.Jason Rees (talk) 20:29, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 21 external links on List of retired Philippine typhoon names. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:13, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on List of retired Philippine typhoon names. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:10, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ompong's retirement

[edit]

Should Ompong be added to the list? Ompong is now one of the costliest typhoons in the Philippines. Jusgtr (talk) 04:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We are not the one to judge what names should or should not be on this list - instead, that call is up to PAGASA who will retire it in due course if it has surpassed P1 billion in damages or killed 300 people. We also have to remember that we need a written reliable source that states that it has been retired in order to prove that it has been retired.Jason Rees (talk) 10:52, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The storm has already breached the criteria for retirement, should it be considered a retired name? Jusgtr (talk) 13:59, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No because we are not the ones who retire names and we also need to prove that its been retired with a written reliable source nefore it gets added.Jason Rees (talk) 07:09, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replacement names

[edit]

@LABSJAY: Is there any reason why we need to record the what name PAGASA has decided to use to replace the name or spin them into another section entitled "Replacement names for Decommissioned names later Retired". I personally feel that we would be including too much if we were to include what name PAGASA has decided to use to replace the name or when the replacement names were used. I note that while other stuff exists we do not include replacement names in other regional lists, as its hard to source them. I also note that the "Replacement names for Decommissioned names later Retired" is not sourced and we seem to be guessing over some of the replacement names which is not allowed per Wikipedia's rules on original research.Jason Rees (talk) 14:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quinta and Rolly

[edit]

Hi @KILLERXR:, I was just wondering what your source was for the names Quinta and Rolly being retired by PAGASA since as far as I know it isn't an automatic process. Regards, Jason Rees (talk) 12:31, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the claims. It will continue to be removed unless it's back up with a source. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 16:32, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I added them back because there is already a reliable source refer to this article[1]KILLERXR (talk) 01:00, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ San Juan, Alexandria Dennise (November 13, 2020). "PAGASA to retire Ulysses from its list of tropical cyclone names". Manila Bulletin. Retrieved November 13, 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Inclusion of presumed future retired local names

[edit]

In an news article by the Manila Bulletin Venus Valdemoro of PAGASA’s Public Information Unit said the bureau will likely decommission or retire local names (ex. “Ulysses”) from its list of tropical cyclone names after it'll cause more than 300 deaths or 1-Billion peso in damage..[1]. KILLERXR (talk) 11:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ San Juan, Alexandria Dennise (November 13, 2020). "PAGASA to retire Ulysses from its list of tropical cyclone names". Manila Bulletin. Retrieved November 13, 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Jolina, Maring and Odette

[edit]

I just want to ask where is the source of retirement of Jolina, Maring and Odette. Hurricane4235 🌀 03:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I remove this claim, PAGASA did not retired the name there is no source it. HurricaneEdgar 09:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now update this Because PAGASA now announced it. Daniel boxs (talk) 10:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the Source. https://pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/climps/climateforum/special_lecture_tcws.pdf Daniel boxs (talk) 14:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update this!

[edit]

Hello! Can you update it? because they have already released the Retired Announcement "Jolina", "Maring", and "Odette" and total all the By Letters, By Decade and the Statistics thank you! Daniel boxs (talk) 10:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel boxs: Have you got a source for allegation that the names "Jolina", "Maring", and "Odette" have now been retired by PAGASA. If not then we can not update the relrevant articles.Jason Rees (talk) 13:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the Source. https://pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/climps/climateforum/special_lecture_tcws.pdf Daniel boxs (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is an interesting source for certain but it isnt good enough to say that the names "Jolina", "Maring", and "Odette" were retired as it doesnt specifically say that they were retired.Jason Rees (talk) 14:08, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rai is obvious, (Odette, but for Kompasu (Maring) Deaths (44) and for Conson (Jolina), Deaths or Damage. Idk it's kinda like Sonamu (2013). Sonamu caused 2 deaths and minimal damage and got retired. GDFilbert (talk) 20:02, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My Thoughts (Rai Damage Deaths) GDFilbert (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@GDFilbert: Doesn't matter if it's "obvious", it's not stated by the source. It's original research at best, which is prohibited. Chlod (say hi!) 20:07, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Odette (Rai) was retired most likely due to it causing 400< deaths and $1.02 billion USD in damages. It is also the 2nd costliest typhoon in the Philippines. My thoughts (to why it was retired) came from https://pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/climps/climateforum/special_lecture_tcws.pdf. GDFilbert (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, "most likely". No actual declaration. On Wikipedia, we don't make assumptions. Do not restore the previous without an official announcement. Chlod (say hi!) 20:21, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record a name being "most likely" retired isnt good enough, since names have not been retired despite being obvious retirement cases.Jason Rees (talk) 22:16, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chlod: Is the naming list being updated good enough for us to say that "Jolina", "Maring", and "Odette" were retired. Personally I dont think it is but I want a second opinon before I revert.Jason Rees (talk) 22:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: Yep. That's how it was done for last year too. Chlod (say hi!) 22:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chlod: While im willing to turn a blind eye, I think it needs noting that last year, they published a list of retired names alongside the naming list though but this year they havent.Jason Rees (talk) 23:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: Yeah, the PAGASA tends to be inconsistent like that. For what it's worth, the replacement of a name here means the storm name has been retired, as the PAGASA doesn't drop the name except in certain circumstances (which they'd at least make a press release for). Perhaps a news source could pick up on this later on and we'd have a better source (or the PAGASA themselves make their own press release on their website). Chlod (say hi!) 23:17, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
{[ping|Chlod}} Yeah fortuantly the Manilla Bulletin has picked up on the replacement names, so I guess we can cite that for now and pray that PAGASA releases another list of retired names.Jason Rees (talk) 12:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_retired_Philippine_typhoon_names&oldid=1251314428"