Talk:2016 Atlantic hurricane season

Alex's records (?)

So now this is rare as we have Alex. I just wanted to confirm if these 2 things are really a record for Alex:

1.) With a location of 27N and 31W, did Alex made the record for being the most northern and eastern tropical system in the Atlantic in the month of January or in the months from January through to April?

2.) Similar to 2012, did Alex (and Pali) made the record for having the first time a tropical cyclone is active in both the Eastern P. and Atlantic before their official starts?

Typhoon2013 (talk) 21:16, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The first is trivial, but the second is more noteworthy. In 2012, Aletta and Alberto were both active and pre-season storms, but Aletta was in season by the time Alberto formed. Apparently there were simultaneous storms from January 3-5, 1938 in the Atlantic and EPAC, but the EPAC one was before the database began. Still, we'll have to rely on NHC, Jeff Masters, or anyone else reputable for including any records in the article. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

So should we add the first one in the List of Atlantic hurricane records? There is a list in there which states any other records a storm made, and it says in that section "list is incomplete". Typhoon2013 (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

No, the first one isn't a record, it's trivia. Someone has to call it a record for it to be a record. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Eh... Where did the season summary map come from? It's wildly inaccurate.

The season summary map, linked below, shows a track which covers the entire Atlantic from East to West, as if this was either a storm which formed off the African coast and made its way over towards the Caribbean, or else began its life in the Western Atlantic and tracked Eastwards towards Africa. Either way, the track in no way relates to anything Alex has done, or indeed is projected to do - and reads like the track summary of an entirely different storm.

How are these track graphics generated, and why is this one so inaccurate...?

• 

Even if it is accurate, I agree that the history trail is way too long. This implies the system formed possibly much earlier. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:23, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

There is nothing inaccurate about the map. The NHC first began tracking the extratropical low that led to Alex in the vicinity of the Bahamas. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 03:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Admittably the track could be misleading: the storm indeed originated near the Bahamas and travelled from West to East, not the other way. ~ KN2731 (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the whole thing is misleading, I understand it is accurate but shouldn't we start tracking when the system turns subtropical (As indicated by the light blue square)? I can see why readers are getting confused. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:22, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it would be more misleading to not include the extratropical portion of the track. This is how the NHC has portrayed Alex's history. Until this track is changed by the NHC we are in no way going to censor it. Supportstorm (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

It is Alex 2016 track.png, not a summary map. Someone can upload a summary map that does not include the extratropical period, but please do not remove the extratropical part in the Alex track map. -- Meow 15:58, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

I can see that as being workable. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:30, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I uploaded Alex's track right after it was upgraded and I put it in the 2016 AHS summary image since we didn't have one for this season yet (and I don't know what parameters to use to get the entire basin in the track map generator). — Iune(talk) 19:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Seasonal forecasts table

Okay, I want to have a discussion on this matter before all of the tables are overhauled by two editors. I do not like the new table design as the look feels cluttered, why fix something that isn't broken? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:57, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I would at the very least like to get a consensus from editors on the matter. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:01, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

@Knowledgekid87: First of all, thank you for replying about this. @Jason Rees: started the new format, but only for the PTS forecast table. However I decided to the same to the EPac and Atl basins. So I would say to talk more to JR about it, I guess. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

A consensus should be pulled on this as it is a major sweeping change, I wont be against it if I can see a good reason, and others are on board with the idea. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I will start the consensus in the Wikiproject talk page. But JR is a good person to talk too as well. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

You can always ping him to the discussion. My view is that both tables have virtually the same info, I combined a bit from both including the sources but kept the open layout. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:07, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I did ping him (my first reply here). Just to note that it will be my first time making a consensus, I will be doing the same like Hurricanehink in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Archive 35 if that's all right. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:10, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, and sure. (I think you meant Cyclonebiskit though) I feel there is more than enough room for an agreement as well. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:14, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Done it now! I did 5 options if that's ok. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:23, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I have been away for a few days and had limited internet access, so I will respond now with my thoughts. I changed the format a few months ago now to reflect the format used elsewhere within the project, which I feel works a lot better than the older format. However, thats not to say its perfect and I think there is work to be done on the format. I also suspect that both formats may have accessibility issues especially for screen readers.Jason Rees (talk) 17:35, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Danielle - Final Paragraph - All of the state?

The article states that Danielle prompted school closures across much of the state, however, looking at the source, it says that schools were closed across much (or 'a great part') of the state. rectify speedwise check antefilling Izmik (talk) 13:39, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Your comment makes no sense to me. The text is supported by the source. United States Man (talk) 22:33, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Number 59, source, Danielle did NOT prompt school closures across all of Veracruz, only a lot of the state. Izmik (talk) 10:07, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I read the article. What the Danielle section says is backed up by the source. That is all there is to it. United States Man (talk) 16:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

You speak Spanish? Because it's incorrect. Izmik (talk) 09:34, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, it's been corrected already, but you could always be bold and change it next time. ~ KN2731 {talk} 08:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@Izmik: Sorry. I see now that the problem was fixed between your first comment and my first comment. By the time I looked at it, it was already fixed. That's why I couldn't understand what the problem was. United States Man (talk) 17:09, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Citation?

Do we have a cite for "However, after Danielle, activity halted, as no storms formed in July, an occurrence not seen since 2012."? Sario528 (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@Sario528: There is the National Hurricane Center's Atlantic Monthly Tropical Weather Summary linked here. ~ KN2731 {talk} 12:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Invest 99L subsection?

Although it's not yet named, Invest 99L is getting a lot of attention (e.g. s the Wait-and-See Game With 99L Ending?) due to its predicted path, particularly the potential to cross Florida into the Gulf and become a threat to Lousisiana. Is it worth a subsection under "Storms" yet, or is that clearly reserved for named storms? 71.41.210.146 (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

We only add storms once they are classified. If non-developing disturbances get enough notoriety on their own (like the Louisiana floods), they could get an article, but we only specifically add tropical cyclones. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 19:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

It's now officially Tropical Depression 9 so it has finally made it after a very long wait!!!ShadowDragon343 (talk) 02:26, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Track image for Fiona

Why isn't there a track image for Fiona? Fiona dissipated five days ago, and there still isn't a track image. HurricaneGonzalo | Talk | Contribs 17:20, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@Cyclonebiskit: has been uploading most of the track maps so far, so I'll ping him for help. ~ KN2731 {talk} 09:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Nicole's watches table

Currently has Bermuda sub-listed under the UK. While Bermuda is a UK territory, I think listing it under it may alarm those people in the actual territory, when Nicole most likely will fizzle out in the Atlantic after passing Bermuda. I have repeatedly tried to remove the UK tag but get reverted by an IP (without an edit summary as to why) who doesn't heed the 3RR warning. Thoughts? Template:HurricaneWarningsTable

— Wyliepedia 07:30, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

For the record, User:CAWylie also does not heed the 3RR warning, having also reverted more than 3 times in 24 hours. Anyway, I'm past this, so I removed my revision of UK territory, even though clearly I don't endorse removing it. My impression is that we normally list the top-level bullets by the governing country, followed by sub-bullets to specify which parts of the country -- including overseas territories -- are being warned. Is this not similar to sub-listing Hawaii under the US on the 2016 Pacific hurricane season page whenever Hawaii is placed in a watch or a warning? 68.4.223.138 (talk) 07:39, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Another thing, shouldn't sub-listings (or -bullets) only be needed when there is more than one top-listing, as in to distinguish countries or territories? If only one affected area, why list a c/t? Also, if there is just one affected area, why even have the template table at all? Why not just have prose to say "There is a hurricane warning (hurricane conditions expected within 36 hours) for Bermuda"? — Wyliepedia 08:04, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

The inclusion of the UK is pointless; Bermuda is a UK territory, not part of the UK in the same way as, say, Wales. Moreover, Bermuda is a long way from the UK land mass, which makes the inclusion of UK confusing, and has an independent identity, making the addition of UK unnecessary. Frankly, this feels like rather pointy editing by an editor with an agenda. --Drmargi (talk) 08:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I was typing when I had an edit-conflict, but I was saying pretty much the same as Drmargi Red Jay (talk) 09:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I can't see a good reason for its addition at all. The editor is doing the same thing on the Hurricane Nicole article as well; I've just reverted there. --Drmargi (talk) 09:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Julia

User:MarioProtIV recently created an article for Karl. @MarioProtIV and Cyclonebiskit: could you help create the article for Julia as well? Julia has some impacts on SE United States, and also it was the first storm forms inland since Beryl in 1988. --219.79.181.210 (talk) 01:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

I will probably within the next few days. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 01:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. --219.79.181.210 (talk) 02:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

• @MarioProtIV: How about Danielle? It also causes some impacts to Mexico. --219.79.96.122 (talk) 07:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)