Talk:2019 Pacific typhoon season/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Separate systems?

Regarding Sepat's BT formation, it is stated that it formed on 6/24. Originally we had its formation on 6/17. I have made an edit just now regarding this and treated this like the May TDs. The JMA is the RSMC therefore we must follow them. We shall also see in months time in the JMA Weather maps "BT" and see the formation of this system. Typhoon2013 (talk) 11:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

It should be follow with the REAL best track, not weather map.--Oscar1003 (talk) 18:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

@Oscar1003: I am talking about Sepat. Weather map BT are used for only the minor TDs, which I have been doing for the 1980s and 1990s PTS articles few years ago. But what I’m stating is that there are two separate systems here regarding the JMA because we have sources that a TD developed from 6/17 to 6/24. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:07 August 2019 (UTC)

I have also seen your edits and did not prove your statement. Therefore, revert back to my edit placing Sepat’s BT formation to the 24th. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

JTWC only began tracking it on the 26th, so that doesn't support the formation date either. Noah^Talk 22:19, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

I think Sepat is formed on June 17 - 28. And there is another TD on June 24.--Oscar1003 (talk) 03:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

@Oscar1003: You said to follow the "REAL best track" and you are right (link up the top of this talk page in the table), but what you have said is not a BT. Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:26, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Article on Francisco

I have made an article on Typhoon Francisco and I want you writers to go through it and add to the article before I post it.

Typhoon Francisco (2019)

User:ConnerTea

@ConnerTea: It may be WP:TOOSOON to create an article. I would suggest waiting until the extent of the impact is more or less known. Noah^Talk 23:16, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Agree as per @Noah:. One of the criteria for a good, decent article is the amount of sources and information. As I do believe we need articles for Francisco (and tbh also for Wipha), we just need more information right now. Moreover, creating the MH section would be much more harder because our previous admins have stopped archiving JMA and JTWC sources, sadly. :( Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Someone make 2019 Pacific typhoon season article semi-protected

The IP address editors keep continue adding more fake infomation/unsourced in the pending edits waiting for review after pending edits has been reverted like IP address editor made Krosa a category 2 but it's not because it's still classified as STS on Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) website so that's why this article need to be semi-protected. EllaCyclone (talk) 17:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Update: Not again, IP address and non confirmed editors keep changing Lekima to Category 5 without source in the pending edits list after reverted edits multiple times EllaCyclone (talk) 14:39, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

IP in question has been blocked after being reported to WP:AIV. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 14:58, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

@KN2731, Jason Rees, Jasper Deng, Hurricanehink, and Hurricane Noah: Can we please change this article to semi-protected rather than the pending changes thing? For some reason, some of my edits keep being marked as subject to review despite me having nearly 4000 edits on Wikipedia and being here for two-and-a-half years. It is very frustrating, as no one should be required to review my edits before they become visible. There is no point in making it pending anyway—half of the IP edits end up being rejected or reverted. Just make it semi-protected. If they want to edit, then they should just make an account. It is really not that difficult. ChocolateTrain (talk) 12:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Or @Hurricanehink: can give you the appropriate user right (Pending Change Reviewer) as I doubt self-protection is right for this article and you are a trusted user.Jason Rees (talk) 12:11, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@ChocolateTrain: I'd put in a request at WP:RfPP but I doubt it'll get approved because there hasn't been a particularly high rate of disruptive editing (there's no defined baseline, but from my experience 3 separate instances in 24 hours would be sufficient). The permission you're looking for can be requested at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Pending changes reviewer. It's essentially a given as long as one has a history of reverting addition of unsourced content or vandalism. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 16:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@KN2731: Thanks for replying. I guess the IP edits are just something we'll have to monitor closely. Also, Hurricanehink has very kindly made me a Pending changes reviewer, so the issue will hopefully be resolved now. ChocolateTrain (talk) 16:07, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Was lekima the strongest

I thought we based in on pressure and it had a lower pressure than Wutip HurricaneMichael2018 (talk) 11:53, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

No it didn't; both were given 920.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:14, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

It was given {briefly} 915hPa Duckno (talk) 10:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Typhoon Lekima article

I have made the new article on Lekima

Typhoon Lekima.

What Time Zone does this article follow?

I think we need a time zone to follow (such as UTC) to avoid conflict on the formation/dissipation dates. AAnnoonnyymous (talk) 04:51, 13 August 2019 (UTC) It should be using UTC per project standards.Jason Rees (talk) 12:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Although most users follow UTC when editing, there are still some users that don’t follow it.There are still some data that aren’t based on UTC, but when users try to change it back, someone reverts them. AAnnoonnyymous (talk) 03:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

3TDs

I believe there are 3 TDs. (90, 91, 92W) However, at 'systems' section, there are 2 TDs that formed 8/29, 8/30, while at 'season effects' section, there are two TDs that formed 8/30, 8/31. I think it should be fixed, but I'm not used to editing. I would thank anyone who fixes this tiny problem.Luke Kern Choi 5 (talk) 08:44, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

There are 2 TDs that are probably well noticed and one which was insignificant at the Other systems section. That's probably why there are three TDs at the table in the Season effects section. ╲\FireBlade708^Talk/╱ 21:13, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Article for Faxai

Does anyone think that Typhoon Faxai deserve it's own article? Faxai may have been significant enough to have it's own article based on the damage and deaths Faxai made. Just a question. F B 708 21:15, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Absolutely, and I’d say the same thing about any landfalling typhoon also deserving an article. Anyone who wants to make a Faxai article should feel free to do so. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 22:00, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok. I will try my best to make the article as a draft for Faxai. F B 708 22:27, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@FireBlade708: @Hurricanehink: Not even just Faxai. But both Lingling and Kajiki does deserve to have its own article. But this just relates back to an earlier topic earlier in the year regarding citations since one of our previous editors here has stopped archiving sources for the storm's MH, hence why this PTS article are lacking with sourced for now. :( Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:33, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

@Typhoon2013: I agree with you. Those storms also deserve a article of themselves. Yet I've seen many tropical cyclone season articles with [citation needed] on the content. It's annoying how users just don't cite the evidence or get the archive of the cite of the dead website. F B 708 13:58, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

One can always make the article, even without the detailed MH, and focus on the impacts. That is the most important part of the article, having the thorough chronology of the impacts, damages, and deaths. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:12, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

@FireBlade708, I made an article on Lingling, entitled Typhoon Lingling (Liwayway). Any of ypu are feww to edit it. Duckno (talk) 10:34, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

TD Amang on timeline

Since TD Amang was downgraded to a disturbance on January 6th until the 19th, shouldn't the timeline table account for this and have a space in between as well? This is already done in the timeline table for Tropical cyclones in 2019. Rosalina2427 ^{(talk to me)} 06:08, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

JMA recognised only one period as a tropical depression. 🐱💬 05:15, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

@Meow: Thanks for the clarification. In that case, on the article Tropical cyclones in 2019, would the timeline bar for Amang be changed accordingly to reflect that? Rosalina2427 ^{(talk to me)} 13:51, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

From what agency should most data for Pacific typhoons be gathered?

Good day! I am just curious about one thing, and I would like to ask about it in this talk page. Exactly from what agency should most data for Pacific typhoons be gathered for use in making Wikipedia articles for typhoons? Shouldn't it be first from the Japan Meteorological Agency, since it was assigned by the World Meteorological Organization as the tropical cyclone Regional Specialized Meteorological Center for the Western Pacific basin (and supply data from other agencies such as JTWC, PAGASA, KMA, CMA, etc. for specific/localized data or for additional information)? Just to satiate my curiosity. Thank you! —Nairb.Idi9 (talk)

That is correct. As RSMC, the JMA data takes precedence, with JTWC, PAGASA and other national organizations used for additional information like you had mentioned. — Iune talk 23:07, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I understand; it should be, primarily, from the JMA. I had this curiosity since, after observing this article, I think most of the data used in these kinds of articles on typhoon seasons are taken of JTWC or other agencies aside from JMA, particularly in the TC tracks (which are color-coded using the Saffir-Simpson Scale) and in reporting a currently active tropical cyclone (I was observing how the article changed during typhoons Lingling and Tapah). I don't know if it is just me or I'm just mistaken. I'd love to hear an explanation for this and be corrected if there is anything I see incorrectly. Thank you! —Nairb.Idi9 (talk)

Should we make Mitag an article?

This storm may be powerful in affecting Japan, and I think Mitag (Onyok) deserves an article of his own. Duckno (talk) 23:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

@Duckno: Please chill out and wait! This storm has not yet caused any damage whatsoever, and plus, it wouldn't really be regarded as "powerful". Typhoon2013 (talk) 09:38, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Typhoon Faxai article

I have made an official article that I need people to edit. I mainly need someone to rewrite the Meteorological History section.
Typhoon Faxai (2019
User:ConnerTea

Season Summary

Please provide source for the information. The unsourced information and opinion section I removed may be found at Talk:2019 Pacific typhoon season/Season summary. Noah^Talk 21:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Does Typhoon Hagibis need a main article?

Typhoon Hagibis (Perla) is a very strong storm, and a storm like that needs its own article.

@Typhoon You-too: To answer your question... No, it does not currently need its own article. I would begin preparing a draft though because it will likely need an article in a few days. Noah^Talk 02:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@Noah: can you give me a link so I can edit it, Thanks!

ANNOUNCEMENT: Since Hagibis reached supertyphoon intensity, I will create the page. See it on my main page Typhoon Hagibis (2019)

@Typhoon You-too and Hurricane Noah: I believe it should become an article now as it will affect Japan no matter what (landfall or not). It will cause damage and disrupt events such as the 2019 Rugby World Cup. Jayab314 23:56, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes because of the direct impact to Japan and everything that's being affected. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 21:35, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Typhoon You-too, Hurricane Noah, and KyuuA4: I went ahead and created the article Typhoon Hagibis (2019). Jayab314 02:28, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jayab314: Yeah, at this point it needs an article. Noah^Talk 02:31, 12 October 2019 (UTC)