Template talk:Infobox weather event/Archive 1

Contrast issues in category headers

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.

---

{{Storm colour}} currently contains an informational box containing a notice not to use links on elements that use the storm color output as a background. I've began performing checks on each storm color, and have found that many of them have contrast issues with links, for example: cat5 and depression. The full list of problematic colors can be found in Module:Tropical cyclone categories § Full list of available values. Because of this, I'm proposing that links be removed from storm headers (primarily scale/agency links) and instead moved somewhere else (perhaps next to the interval note), however I'm unsure as to whether this will still be aesthetically pleasing or confusing to readers. A comparison has been provided below for good measure.

Current	Proposal 1	Proposal 2
Category 5 major hurricane (SSHWS) 10-minute sustained (NWS) Category 3 severe tropical cyclone (BOM) 10-minute sustained Tropical depression (JMA) 10-minute sustained	Category 5 major hurricane 10-minute sustained (SSHWS/NWS) Category 3 severe tropical cyclone 10-minute sustained (BOM) Tropical depression 10-minute sustained (JMA)	Category 5 major hurricane SSHWS/NWS (10-minute sustained) Category 3 severe tropical cyclone BOM (10-minute sustained) Tropical depression JMA (10-minute sustained)

Please feel free to leave comments, suggestions, or alternatives. I'll push through with these changes eventually if there's no other input. Chlod (say hi!) 20:51, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather. Chlod (say hi!) 21:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support proposal 1- Proposal seems more than reasonable enough, and I do like the example being provided for what might be changed, and after seeing both examples side by side, I can safety say that the current format is definitely hard to see in terms of contrast, and the proposed change will help fix that issue. After looking at the second proposal, i do think that both look better than the current configuration, however I feel option 1 is more aesthetically pleasing. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 21:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
• Added in Proposal 2. Re-pinging participants: @CycloneFootball71:. Chlod (say hi!) 22:29, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support proposal 1 Proposal one looks better than proposal two. It just seems weird having the agency first. Noah^Talk 02:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support proposal 1 - Per above.Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:47, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

  Btw, which is correct – BOM or BoM ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:56, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

  @Beraniladri19: Either is correct. Capitalization varies per source, so even with MOS:CAPSACRS, there's no specific capitalization for the Bureau of Meteorology. Chlod (say hi!) 04:01, 31 January 2022 (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.

Unclosed italics lint error

Chlod: Template:Infobox weather event/JMA/doc generates a Missing end tag lint error for italics in the markup

{{#invoke:Infobox weather event/scalebar|main|scale=JMA}}

I suspect the solution is to edit Module:Infobox weather event/scalebar and change

.. math.floor(minKmh) .. "–" .. math.floor(maxKmh) .. " km/h'', "

to

.. math.floor(minKmh) .. "–" .. math.floor(maxKmh) .. " km/h, "

because the italics are closed on the following line. Please figure this out. Anomalocaris (talk) 20:08, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris: Thanks for pointing this out! I've removed the extraneous apostrophes and confirmed that Special:PageInfo/Template:Infobox weather event/JMA/doc no longer lists the lint error. Chlod (say hi!) 20:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Winds provided in knots for /Tornado

Moved from Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/New Weather Infobox#Discussion

How about you fix the tornado boxes so that you don't have to input knots when the damage is reported in miles per hour? That is highly annoying and opens up a source for errors. This is yet another instance of you "fixing" something that wasn't broken and was working just fine. But, I guess tinkering with everything is what you do best. United States Man (talk) 05:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Repetition of tornado rating in /Tornado

Moved from Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/New Weather Infobox#Discussion

Is there any way to fix the repetition in the tornado infoboxes? The strength of the tornado is listed in the color bar, and then immediately below that it lists the maximum rating again. wxtrackercody (talk · contributions) 01:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Wxtrackercody! Thanks for bringing this up; working on this now. Chlod (say hi!) 02:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed. Chlod (say hi!) 03:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

RSI parameter issue in /Winter storm

Moved from Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/New Weather Infobox#Discussion

It also seems that Infobox weather event/Winter storm doesn't have an option to set an exact RSI value (I had to remove it in when adding it here) Infinity (talk - contributions) 00:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@RandomInfinity17: Thanks for pointing this out. It seems the RSI parameter wasn't properly re-implemented. Please delay in converting the boxes until this issue has been fixed; I'll give you a ping once this happens (probably in the next 6 hours). Chlod (say hi!) 01:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@RandomInfinity17:  Fixed. I've also updated February 13–17, 2021, North American winter storm to reflect the change. Chlod (say hi!) 03:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Duration in /Tornado outbreak

The duration parameter /Tornado outbreak seems to have been removed (it was present in Infobox storm). I know that there is already a duration parameter in the header, but this is specifically for tornado outbreaks, like winter storms with tornado outbreaks. Infinity (talk - contributions) 16:43, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

@RandomInfinity17: Duration is part of the main infobox, not tornado outbreak specifically. Noah^Talk 21:03, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

@Hurricane Noah: I'm talking about the duration of the tornado outbreak in winter storm or storm complex articles. For example, the November 2020 North American storm complex had a tornado outbreak with a duration of 12 hours, 43 minutes. However, the entire storm complex last three days, so the making duration parameter the duration of the tornado outbreak wouldn't make sense. For just tornado outbreak articles, it makes sense to use the duration parameter in the main infobox, but for winter storm/storm complex articles with tornado outbreaks, it doesn't make sense to use it for the tornado outbreak. Infinity (talk - contributions) 21:33, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

@RandomInfinity17: Supposedly you'd use another /History box for this, but given how the duration is only ever a feature of the outbreak box (and another meteorological history bar just for the duration would take too much space), I've decided to add this in as part of the outbreak box. You should now be able to use the |duration= parameter for it. A warning will be shown if this parameter is used in articles with "tornado outbreak" in the title. Chlod (say hi!) 22:49, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Support for customized units in /Tornado

@ChessEric, @RandomInfinity17: The |winds= parameter of /Tornado now supports unit customization by appending the unit directly after the value. See below for examples.

Wikitext	Output
{{Infobox weather event/Tornado | winds = 56 <!-- Still knots, by default --> }}	Tornado Highest winds 105 km/h (65 mph)
{{Infobox weather event/Tornado | winds = 80mph }}	Tornado Highest winds 130 km/h (80 mph)
{{Infobox weather event/Tornado | basin = atl | winds = 56 kph }}	Tornado Highest winds 35 mph (55 km/h)

I'm holding off on implementing this at a lower level (on the /meteorology level) while I decide how to make this compatible with automatic categories (which require that values must always be in knots). Chlod (say hi!) 04:37, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

You'll also notice a discrepancy on that third box. This is due to km/h → knots → km/h conversion. This will be much better handled when I've transferred this functionality to /meteorology. Chlod (say hi!) 04:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

That looks good but some articles need fixing, see the "tornado" entries at Category:Convert errors. It would be better if someone who understands the topic were to fix them. Johnuniq (talk) 06:36, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

@Johnuniq:  All fixed. Chlod (say hi!) 06:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Johnuniq (talk) 06:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Good job bro. I like how this was done for the metric system as well. ChessEric 13:33, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

/Current subbox, related templates finished

Work on the /Current subbox and support for current data has been completed. See Template:Infobox weather event/doc § Current storms for specific details, and Template:Infobox weather event/doc § Article page active storm and Template:Infobox weather event/doc § Season page active storm for examples. {{Infobox tropical cyclone current}} has been marked as deprecated accordingly. Chlod (say hi!) 02:27, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

The basin= parameter is in the documentation but not in the template

The |basin= parameter is in the documentation but not in the template. This is also true of |category= and |type=. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:29, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Jonesey95. For which templates do these apply to? |basin= nor |category= do not seem to be in Template:Infobox weather event#TemplateData. Chlod (say hi!) 13:34, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

This template, {{Infobox weather event}}. |basin= is used in most transclusions of this template (over 1,000 articles), but it does not appear to do anything in the template. See Category:Pages using infobox weather event with unknown parameters. For |category=, which also does not appear to do anything in the template, see this list of articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:44, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: I can only ever chalk this up to bad conversion between previous templates, as these were done manually by editors. |category=, |basin=, and |type= are specifically only for sub-boxes of /meteorology, and have been documented as such ever since I started making these templates. Selecting a few of these at random, these seem to have been added mostly by @JCMLuis and @Therealangelo1177; they would be much better at explaining how that got there than I would know. Chlod (say hi!) 13:55, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

I'll also note that in Template:Infobox weather event/doc/Feature parity (which should have been the definitive guide to converting these templates, and is linked within the first few sentences of the documentation), I specifically noted that those three parameters would be dropped or moved to other templates. Why they would still be used on that template, even when there is documentation against doing so, is likely an issue with how the boxes are converted and not how the documentation is written. Chlod (say hi!) 14:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

I have ripped through some of the articles and removed the redundant parameters.Jason Rees (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Same here, been removing them where I see them. In most cases it looks like moving them down to the SSHWS subbox will suffice. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:11, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Pinging TheBigBookOfNaturalScience who's also been converting boxes recently. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 10:32, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Please don't ping me again. I do not appreciate it. 📖 (💬/📜) 17:07, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

The merger proposal

Will {{Infobox tropical cyclone small}} get merged into this template, or will it be remained as it is? Just a random Wikipedian^(talk) 11:11, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@JrandWP: That template is likely to remain. It already follows the same layout and look of this template, and is much more compact — perfect for season articles. Chlod (say hi!) 11:14, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

This is for season summary, and the template is suitable for larger articles for storms? Just a random Wikipedian^(talk) 11:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@JrandWP: Correct; this template is for dedicated articles, and should only be used in season articles (or other articles that document multiple storms) when used in the context of current storms. Chlod (say hi!) 11:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

But for two cyclones related together, it maybe considered to use this template? Just a random Wikipedian^(talk) 11:55, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@JrandWP: For the season articles? It would depend on how those cyclones are presented in the article. In most cases, the {{Infobox tropical cyclone small}} template is still applicable. Chlod (say hi!) 11:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Heat Waves

Chlod If you have time, would you consider making a box for heat waves since it is summer rn? US heat scale is <80F = Warm, 80-89F = C4: Very Warm, 90-104F = C3: Hot, 105-129F = C2: Very Hot, ≥130F = C1: Extremely Hot. Noah^Talk 01:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Hurricane Noah: How would this differ from {{Infobox heat event}}? Or do you intend to replace that box entirely? Chlod (say hi!) 01:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Tbh it probably needs replaced since we are simplifying the amount of boxes and making changes, although that may require a separate consensus. The major differences are the inclusion of a heat index parameter and the US heat index scale for usage for US events. Not sure if other countries have their own scales or not but we should have the ability to host them if they do. Noah^Talk 20:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Infobox not showing up by itself

Hello, I was wondering if anyone could assist me with the infobox on 2023 South Korea floods. Before, it used the {{Infobox flood}} template; however, since it was deprecated, I wanted to switch to using this Infobox weather event template.

When I have just the Infobox weather event, it shows up in the preview, but when I commit my changes, it disappears and there is no infobox on the page at all. It seems to only exist if accompanied by another infobox. Right now, I have used an empty Infobox flood template underneath, but it looks bad. You can see some experimentation in the page history. I'm not sure if this is a bug or if I have something wrong in the source code. Thanks! ⇒ Lucie Person (talk|contribs) 22:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Lucie Person! The template requires a footer template, as indicated in the documentation. See Special:Diff/1166971382 for reference. Chlod (say hi!) 22:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

For some reason, this infobox works unlike nearly every other infobox. It's a problem. See, specifically, the part of the documentation that reads "All usages must be followed by Template:Infobox weather event/Footer to close the infobox", and then click the "see below" link for details if you need them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

The "reason" is because weather events are highly convoluted, with over a dozen meteorological agencies (both globally official and locally official), each releasing their own products on a lot of different storm types with variations between the data they provide. It is one big (and incredibly annoying) rabbit hole of satisfying edge case after edge case—really just the side effect of representing a global collection of unstandardized data in a tiny box. There is no "one shoe fits all" solution with any of these agencies; data on storms just isn't as simple as books or movies. Chlod (say hi!) 23:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

IBTrACS parameter

I noticed the template displays a link to IBTrACS when added through this template or through its associated Wikidata page. See Hurricane Dorian for an example, the infobox has a link that says "IBTrACS". Wouldn't this work better displaying the link as a reference citation?

There's an inactive template IBTRACS which does this action. – The Grid (talk) 13:07, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

@The Grid: The {{IBTRACS}} template seems to link to the whole list rather than a specific one, unlike what the link does (I guess to follow the citation guide given by NCEI). In any case, I assume you'd like to have the link replaced with a reference instead? My initial thought was that IBTrACS doesn't really have the data that would fit in the /Effects box, hence the use of a link rather than a reference, otherwise we'd be misrepresenting the source of the data. Chlod (say hi!) 13:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Yes, I was thinking a citation would be better than its current display as a link saying IBTrACS. I get it's provided in that row as a footnote along with anything entered in the ref fields. It feels like focus is unnecessarily drawn to the IBTrACS link in the infobox if that makes sense. – The Grid (talk) 13:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

FWIW when I suggested having a link to IBTrACS over at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Weather/New_Weather_Infobox#Arbitrary_subsection I was thinking of something similar to the database links in {{Chembox}}, which also makes uses of Wikidata (random example). ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 15:20, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Regarding changing Infobox flood to Infobox weather event

Hey there! I'm currently in the process of changing all Infobox flood transclusions to this template. However, in the process, I caught up in a discussion with @Nikkimaria in "1997 Red River flood" on whether is it necessary to change the infobox in the first place, as Nikki said that there's no significant need to change the old template to the new one. Nikki also removed the "deprecated" tag in the flood infobox document.

I'm here to seek some detailed info on what significant advantages(s) the weather event infobox has over the flood one, as the template change clean-up discussion I find was mostly revolved around cyclone infoboxes, as pointed out by Nikki. PEACE SΞΞKΞRS [Talk] 06:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Why are you changing infobox flood to infobox weather event? Was there a TFD discussion that led to a consensus that the template should be deprecated? Were the usual affected editors notified? It looks like the "deprecated" template was added to the doc page in April 2023 by JrandWP. That editor also marked Infobox storm and Infobox tropical cyclone. Apparently, there was a poorly advertised RFC (here is the very short list of pages that link to it) that does not appear to have been linked from the talk pages for the affected templates. I do not see evidence that the creators of the affected templates were notified about the discussion, which would have been another minimal step in deprecating a template. I recommend a proper, well advertised TFD. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: what do you suggest we do about the current situation considering the implementation is already nearly 2/3 of the way there? Noah, AA^Talk 14:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

At a minimum, do the usual notifications on talk pages of the affected templates and the talk pages of creators of those templates. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)