One day after reading the List of off-season Atlantic hurricanes, I noticed we did not have an article for the off-season tropical cyclones in the EPAC (East Pacific) basin. Therefore, I decided to create this article in December 2010, when Tropical Storm Omeka was active. This is also the last article needed to be upgraded before the off-season Pacific hurricanes can become a good topic. Because of improvements by myself and several other editors, I believe this article should be considered a Featured List. I will be co-noming this with two other editors – CycloneIsaac and YE. Finally, I would like to note that this will be a WikiCup nomination.--12george1 (talk) 03:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
This wonderful piece of list. Upon the formation of Tropical Storm Omeka, GC was bored one day and decided to create a sandbox, little did he know it would turn out to be on FLC today. Therefore, Hink was bored and started checking user cotribs, and the two later did a collab; however, after a few edits my me in January, it was largely ignored before being moved to the mainspace in October, playing a small role in my WP:CUP epic run to the bronze medal in 2011. Then, my new friend, Cy10 discovered this listed and dabbed it with edit. Now, all three of us, here we are today. YEPacificHurricane 03:54, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Omekas dates need tweaking to reflect the heavily delayed Tropical Cyclone Report issued on it by the CPHC.
Should the dates start when the subtropical depression developed or when it crossed the International Dateline?--12george1 (talk) 16:36, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Since we are not told what category the TC's are is the line "The category refers to the intensity on the Saffir–Simpson Hurricane Scale; TS stands for tropical storm, TD for tropical depression, and SS for subtropical cyclone" and the colours really needed?. If so please either add the categories back in and add the space needed between subtropical cyclone.
Per a press release from the NOAA, the region and tropical cyclone basin defined as the "East Pacific" stretches from North America westward to 140W, and is strictly north of the equator. Latin America, as stated in the lead, includes South America, but the official definition of the basin does not include areas south of the equator, so this would be confusing.
The International Dateline does not strictly follow longitudinal paths in the coordinate system, so it curves around 180W to include some islands and countries. It only roughly follows the 180th meridian, so it's either the International Dateline or 180W as the CPAC's western boundary, not both.
I honeslty don't know here. It's not a major issues probs, it's not like Alaska gets cyclones. YEPacificHurricane 18:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
It's still incorrect. They aren't the same line, so it's one or the other, not both. TheAustinMan(Talk·Works) 18:41, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
The first paragraph, after the first reference, does not appear anywhere in the rest of the article and is unsourced. Where did you get that 99% of Pacific hurricanes form during the season limits, for example?
"The strongest hurricane between December to May was Hurricane Ekeka in 1992, which reached winds of 115 miles per hour (185 km/h). " → Since you use 'between' it should be 'December and May', not 'December to May'. You should also link Hurricane Ekeka, just like you did with Nina.
"The unnamed tropical storm of 1996 killed two people when it sank a trimaran called the Solar Wind." → You should be specific and state that it was 'assumed' to have killed two people, since you say that in the data table.
"Of all cyclones during the off-season, the "Froc Cyclone" lasted longest;(References redacted) though reliable records indicate that Hurricane Alma in 1990 had the longest duration." → The way you word this sentence makes it seem like reliable records dispute that the Froc Cyclone lasted longest. You should indicate that Hurricane Alma had the longest duration after the inception of the Pacific HURDAT.
That's all I have for now, I will likely support when these qualms are fixed. TheAustinMan(Talk·Works) 17:57, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
One issue I forgot to make note of. The table does not comply with WP:ACCESS for one reason in particular – a screen reader would not be able to tell the intensity-classification of a storm via the table alone. TheAustinMan(Talk·Works) 18:56, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Yea, that's what I was referring to. I also think you should add a note that Omeka began as subtropical, so that first sentence of the article makes sense. In addition, I think you should have two listings for the dates, since Omeka exited the basin. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Now it implies it was subtropical in the WPAC on those dates. Can you go for something simpler? That it was subtropical from 18-20 in the CPAC, was in the WPAC from 20-22, then tropical from 22 onward in the CPAC? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
I added that, but I think that would make it even more confusing.—CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 17:57, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Were any of the storms in "Chronology" in the eastern Pacific proper?
Of course, but how is it worth mentioning really? The border between the two AOR's is just some arbitrary line. YEPacificHurricane 00:15, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Because some are mentioned by CPHC and some aren't. You have a notes section for a reason. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:35, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, as of this writing, Beryl 12 was monitored by the WPC, and not mentioned in the ATL one? Are you implying that should be noted in the ATL pages of well? Honestly, I don't think it's important. YEPacificHurricane 01:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
WPC? The CPAC and EPAC are two sub-basins. The ATL has no such distinction. And as I said, you have a notes section for a reason.--♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
Neither of those have a notes section like this one does, and neither feature storms before the start of HURDAT. My confusion about WPC was its relevancy. Here, it'd make sense to note. For the January 1938 one, the MWR says "there were some evidences of the formation of a tropical LOW between the Revillagigedo Islands and Lower California" - so perhaps note the uncertainty? The MWR didn't definitively say it was a TC. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
"Overall, Paka caused $580 million (1997 USD) in damage, enough to warrant retirement of the name "Paka"" - no need to say the name twice. You can say "enough to warrant retirement of the name". --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:35, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Firstly, I will openly admit I know nothing about hurricanes, so I apologise if any of my comments are silly, or I'm asking for an explanation of the seemingly obvious.
The title of the article is "List of off-season Pacific hurricanes", but the first sentence states, "There have been 20 recorded tropical and subtropical cyclones that existed in the east Pacific basin outside of the official Pacific hurricane season." Does this article only refer to off-season hurricanes in the "east Pacific basin"? There is some discussion of a "Central Pacific", but no mention of a western or southern pacific. Are they beyond the scope of the article, or is it simply that all off-season hurricanes just happen to have occurred in the east?
Neither, they are not called "hurricanes" in the western and south pacific. YEPacificHurricane 23:39, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
The article should make this clear then, because it seems a glaring omission otherwise. Harriastalk 12:40, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
I think that's a bit overboard, but I added a wikilink that goes into this more detailed.
Following the wikilink provided, I reached the article Pacific hurricane, which states that "A Pacific hurricane, then, is a tropical cyclone in the northern Pacific Ocean east of 180°, or in the southern Pacific Ocean east of 160°E." Which seems to contradict the claim that they are not called "hurricanes" in the south Pacific. Also, to clarify, did all of the twenty exist in the "east Pacific basin", in which case, why is the "central Pacific" mentioned? I'm sorry to say that the links have just confused me more. Harriastalk 20:49, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
At times TC's are called hurricanes within South Pacific by various agencies (eg NOAA), however they are not included in this list because their mainly known as cyclones. Another reason is because the season in the Southern Hemisphere is the exact opposite to the Northern Hemisphere and thus would be better included in a List of off-season Southern hemisphere tropical cyclones than EPAC TCs. Also your other point basically boils down to the definition of the "Eastern Pacific basin" in the Northern Hemisphere which has a double meaning thanks to the US - the first meaning is the Americas to 140W, which is the one commonly used rather than the other one which is the Americas - 180.Jason Rees (talk) 21:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
The "central Pacific" is often considered a sub-set of the "eastern Pacific" (and wiki articles do that same), I tweaked the article slightly. Any better? YEPacificHurricane 21:21, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
There is some inconsistency in capitalisation: "east Pacific", "Central Pacific", "Eastern Pacific"
"Only Hurricane Nina caused both property damage and fatalities while remaining just offshore of the Hawaiian Islands." The way this is currently phrased creates a very specific set of rules: Hurricane Nina is the only tropical cyclone to: cause property damage AND fatalities AND remain just offshore of the Hawaiian Islands. I'm guessing it should be rephrased to state that it was the only tropical cyclone to do both of those things, and it did them while remaining offshore..
" that existed in the" reads really odd to me, you mean they "formed" there, or they were "recorded there"? "existed" there seems to imply it just a case of someone popping by to discover them, like fossils.
In theory, whoever wrote them down discovered them, but it's easier to use "formed" I agree. So, changed. YEPacificHurricane 23:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
"There have been 20 recorded tropical and subtropical cyclones that existed in the east Pacific basin outside the official Pacific hurricane season." is there some kind of start point for the definition of this "season"? We often here of "since records began", when would that be for this season?
No. And per the talk page, we as a project agreed to include storms prior to the reliable records. YEPacificHurricane 23:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)