Talk:2020 Atlantic hurricane season

Link Archiving

Bumping thread for 180 days. Noah^Talk 15:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC) I will be adding archive links to the entire article. Please note that the article must be split up in order to do this because of how large it is (ie the tool can't process it). All talk subpages listed below should remain intact for future use with archiving (definitely a must when getting this to GA in the future). Noah^Talk 12:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Archiving Schedule

• Every 15 days during the active season
• Every month outside the active season
• As needed after May

Archive Links

• Top-Bertha
• Cristobal-Laura
• Marco-Vicky
• Storm Names-Season Effects
• Beta–

@Hurricane Noah: Thanks! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Archived again due to extreme activity. Noah^Talk 22:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

TCRs just came out!

Bumping thread for 180 days. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:41, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

• Arthur

~ Destroyeraa🌀 19:11, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Nice. Just managed to add that in before the 21:00 UTC advisory frenzy! Buttons0603 (talk) 21:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Hurricane Sally damage estimates

I saw that on fox buisness they estimated damage estimates of 2-3 billion dollars. I will see if I can link it. I like hurricanes (talk) 23:47, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Here , this is the damage estimates

Probably around 4-7. Yu noducks (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Possible Hurricane Paulette Record

Between Paulette's formation and its reformation, seven named tropical or subtropical storms have developed. This is almost certainly a record - it required a very specific set of circumstances that only years like 2020 could fulfill - but I don't think anyone's been keeping track of that metric. There's already been a good-faith edit stating that this was indeed a record, but it wasn't cited and has since been removed. So... anyone want to go trawling through some databases? Or should this even be mentioned? 2601:282:300:9580:FC32:85E2:53CD:2869 (talk) 07:12, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

It seems like an incredibly trivial record to me that's not worth mentioning. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 07:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree that it's not a "significant record" to set, but (1) it gives a good sense of the momentum of this year's hurricane season and (2) it seems, at least going back to 1950, to have obliterated the previous record by a huge margin. In the period from 1950 to 2019, from a cursory tired glance, I only saw 9 named storms that formed during such intervals total. And then it happened seven times with one storm this year. Is it important? Not especially! Is it interesting? To me, yep! 2601:282:300:9580:FC32:85E2:53CD:2869 (talk) 08:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

The fact you would need to do any real research to “prove” it tells me that this would be considered original research; if it is in fact notable, let a journalist do the work and we can quote her or him. That is the job of an encyclopedic writer. Jordan 1972 (talk) 12:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Currently this is only Original research. Also also, we posted too many trivial records for the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. Enough is enough, and if there are any more records, we may need to created a page called the Records of the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:43, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, it would be original research/synthesis unless some newspaper out there has stated it. Even then, it's a weirdly arbitrary record to look at, since the time between a system dissipating and reforming varies. That being said, if we broke some kind of record like "most tropical cyclones to form in a week," it might be worth noting. TornadoLGS (talk) 14:49, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

So, in the week of September 7-14, Hurricane Paulette, Tropical Storm Rene, Hurricane Sally, Hurricane Teddy and Tropical Storm Vicky formed, at 5. I'm not sure if that's a record. If we do September 11-18 instead though, we have Hurricane Sally, Hurricane Teddy, Tropical Storm Vicky, Tropical Storm Winfred, Subtropical Storm Alpha and Tropical Storm Beta, at 7. That might be a record. Also to note Paulette fully dissipated on September 30. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 12:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Still trivial. Too many records will make this a more DYK article than a prose article. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa: so how about we make a record of the 2020 season article and then add it in there? That’s more of a DYK if we decide to make one. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 13:42, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@67.85.37.186: You probably have to get consensus if you want to make one. Personally, I believe that most of the current records are all formation records, which don't warrant an article. Paulette wasn't the longest-living TC on record either. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa: 1st of all, IP pings don't work. Yes, I know that it wasn't the longest, Hurricane John was. But in the Atlantic, it might have been. I'd be willing to make subsection in this for an article. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Paulette was tropical for only around 10 days, which isn't very long. Storms such as Dorian, Irma, Ivan, etc. have beat it by a lot. We don't count the extratropical portion of Paulette. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh. I was including when it was post tropical. Technically when Hurricane Sandy made landfall it was post tropical, but we do count those damages. If you do include the post tropical time, it is 23 days. Fair point however. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 14:07, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Areas affected: none

In the "Season effects" section, on the line for Hurricane Wilfred, would it be all right to replace "None" with "Central Atlantic Ocean only"? This would give a little bit of location (saying it wasn't in the Caribbean, for example) without losing the fact that it didn't do any damage. 2603:3021:1A04:D800:1C5F:79C7:455D:F1CD (talk) 15:57, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

The point of this section is to indicate areas that experienced some "effect" from the storm. It's not about indicating where the storm is as much as showing certain areas of land that were impacted by the storm (i.e. rainfall, storm surge, etc) DarkSide830 (talk) 17:04, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Correct, the point of the 'Areas affected' box is to show human/land impacts by the storm. Storms that only stay out to sea, do not 'impact' areas. It brought rainfall to... the ocean. Sdslayer100 (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Agreed; if say however, a ship were to be sunk or heavily damaged at sea, would that noteworthy? (I can't recall this ever happening in modern times, though historically it has.) Drdpw (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

It did happen with the Bourbon Rhode during Hurricane Lorenzo, though that affected land as well. That may warrant inclusion at the 2019 article. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

If a ship were to be heavily damaged or sunk at sea the deaths and damages would count, but we would not list it in the Areas affected part of the SE Chart as it isnt a land area. We also have to remember that ships are impacted by TC's all the time.Jason Rees (talk) 22:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Paulette on season summary chart

Wondering if the reformation of Paulette on the season summary chart should be coloured the same as the first part? I think it should be the same colour as it is the same storm (which is why we use the same name). The other storms are all the same colour even though the storm only was at its peak intensity for a short portion of its life. I am going to see how easy it seems to change, otherwise I will leave it for someone else to do. Jordan 1972 (talk) 19:20, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I have reverted your bold edit. See how Beryl and Leslie are denoted in the 2018 Atlantic hurricane season page's graphical timeline. Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 19:33, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Jordan 1972: It is the same storm, yes, but when Paulette reformed, it came back as a tropical storm, which is shown in the two different colorings of the storm. If Paulette had reformed, and re-attained cat 2 intensity, then the coloring would've been the same. It's like what @Drdpw: mentioned, in that in 2018, Hurricanes Beryl and Leslie both dissipated and then reformed as (sub)tropical storms, which gives them two different colors. No other storm has two different colors because no other storm formed, dissipated, and then reformed and reached a secondary intensity less intense than its initial peak. Hope this helps clear some confusion! :) Gumballs678 talk 21:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gumballs678 and Jordan 1972: I think what Gumballs678 means is that Paulette, Beryl, and Leslie because either extratropical or remnant lows, then regenerated into a tropical cyclone. The storms didn't technically dissipate, it's just that we only record the tropical parts of their lifespan in the season summary. It may be a little confusing, and that's understandable. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Hurricane Sally

I've now seen multiple times today changes to Sally's damage estimates, all of them going between 7 billion and 1 billion. Now, I know that the damage estimates will continue to fluctuate as insurance losses continue to be calculated, but going back and forth between two figures hours apart on the same day, seems excessive. Has anyone else noticed this? Furthermore, of the sources currently provided for such totals, most of them are higher than the current $1 billion listed. What estimated cost should be used? Gumballs678 talk 23:41, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gumballs678: Thank you very much. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa: Seems a little more dramatic and unnecessary than needs to be, but I'm glad I wasn't the first person who noticed the changes. As it stands now, is there still a discussion on this matter or has it been resolved? Gumballs678 talk 01:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Gumballs678: I have talked with the other party and proposed we discuss it civilly here. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Damage estimates

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.

---

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]

While unrelated to the dispute between the two parties, my personal belief is that the damage estimate not be updated until the NHC confirms it. However, my personal belief is not the rule of law, and Sally's TCR is still months away from being published. Until then, the dispute between the damage estimates should continue to be discussed here. It appears that there may need to be multiple third parties involved in the dispute to help keep it civil, but to also fact-check any and all arguments that occur. Gumballs678 talk 02:04, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the sources provided, insured losses only are estimated at US$1–3 billion by a few catastrophe modelling agencies. Meanwhile, overall losses are estimated at around US$7–8 billion by one agency (assuming the AL.com article is more updated, since the Reuters piece it links precedes it by a week and quotes the estimate as US$8–10 billion). That same agency states that US$5 billion of "damage and cleanup costs" were likely incurred from "immediate impact", which I would take to mean it does not cover the full extent of damage. The minimum estimate to use here looks to be US$7 billion, since insured losses don't constitute everything. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 09:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

AON estimates will be out in a few days. That’ll clear things up a lot! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

No offense, but can't we just wait to see what the NCDC says the damage estimate is while putting the damage range in for now (i.e. $1-7 billion)? This will obviously be a billion dollar disaster and the NCDC report will clear ALL of this up.ChessEric (talk) 14:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@ChessEric: No offense taken. LOL. Well, other storms all use AoN as the estimator. You can put up $1-8 billion for now. Let's see if others agree. Also, the content dispute is closed, so I'll be removing it.

The latest source we have (al.com) that gives an estimate for the TOTAL cost says at least $7 billion. I don't understand where you guys come up with the $1 billion figure? Firstly, common knowledge should tell you the total cost was far higher than $1 billion. Secondly, all the sources mentioning the $1 billion figure are only referring to insured losses. Insured losses are only a small portion of the total cost of this storm. I already went through this entire discussion once. Literally every single argument in this discussion was already made, was responded to, and was resolved. Now for some reason we have to do it all over again on this page. I already posted this link: [6] which says quote: "Hurricane Sally is not expected to cause a major insurance loss...As the storm was more of a flood event, the ratings agency said, most of the losses will be covered by the U.S. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)." What started this entire dispute was that someone posted a source claiming the cost was $1-3 billion but that same source also literally said that this estimate did not include NFIP losses. In other words the estimate was clearly incomplete and only covered a small portion of the total losses. It is perfectly logical to go with the $7 billion figure for now until we get newer estimates from other reliable sources, which in my opinion will end up being even higher than $7 billion. Ultimately all the figures will be updated at the end of the season when NHC reports come out so this issue doesn't warrant all this time and energy that is being devoted to it. Hurricane21 (talk) 22:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hurricane21: AON reports come out in two days. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa: Yes AON reports will come out in two days and you will see that their estimates will be much closer to the $7 billion figure than to the $1 billion figure. In fact their estimate will likely exceed the $7 billion figure. I hope this entire unnecessary discussion satisfied whatever concerns you had but hopefully next time when someone politely asks you to first discuss the issue before reverting their edits for no reason you follow Wikipedia guidelines (WP:BRD) and actually respect a simple polite request. Hurricane21 (talk) 23:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hurricane21: AON is much more reliable than all the other individual sources. al.com is a local new source in Alabama. There is a rational to say that sources such as KarenCo and Moody are more reliable than a local news source, since KarenCo reliably and closely estimated Isaias's damage. Also remember please that Jasper Deng once told you that we put "storm damage losses", not "total economic losses". JD did not respond because he does not like to respond to people (even when people ask for help or award him). JD is also a very experienced user, with 47,000 edits and 13 years of expertise. Cyclonebiskit is an experienced user and an admin for 5 years. Ask them if you have any more questions, please. Thank you very much, and have a lovely day. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:04, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa:

1. I'm perfectly fine with going with whatever AON says.
2. The al.com source says nothing about "total economic losses". It says quote: "...estimating the overall loss from Hurricane Sally between $7 billion to $8 billion. Of that, $3 billion is insurance losses." It further says: “Our numbers are higher because we are counting things like government expenses, and redirected economic activity,”. My understanding of "economic losses" that JD was referring to was things like businesses/industries shutting down or being unable to operate not storm related government expenses. Government expenses go into things like storm cleanup or fallen tree removal, which as far as I understand are part of the total damage. But even if you would want to exclude those types of expenses, the source still does not indicate that those expenses are a large portion of their estimated total expense so it is illogical to go back down to an unrealistic $1 billion figure. In fact it would have even been ok to go with the original $5 billion figure just to stay on the conservative side but you insisted that we use an obviously false and unrealistic figure of $1 billion.
3. I have no questions to ask JD or Cyclonebiskit but thanks for your suggestion.
4. If you're satisfied with this discussion and feel like we can agree on going with a certain value for now then please say so because there is an open dispute pending on this issue.
Hurricane21 (talk) 00:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hurricane21: I agree that $1 billion is a bit unrealistic, seeing the damage using drones and helicopters from news websites. I am glad how you are open to more damage figures than just the $7-8 billion, I thank you for doing that. I currently am thinking of three ways we can carry on with this below. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:59, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions

1. Put $5-8 billion
2. Put ≥$5 billion
3. Put ≥$7 billion

Any comments or questions, or suggestions will be welcomed. @KN2731, Cyclonebiskit, Gumballs678, ChessEric, and Hurricane21: and others, please put your !votes down below. Thanks.~ Destroyeraa🌀 12:32, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

At this point the better option would have been to just wait for AON reports. Part of my concern with this entire discussion was that we're spending way too much time and energy on something that ultimately doesn't matter. I'm simply trying to say sometimes its better not to open up disputes on small issues like this. Anyways I went ahead and voted anyways. Hurricane21 (talk) 01:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Hurricane21: Thank you. Yeah, I'm also eager for the AON reports, but we have to put something for now. Can't vote since I wrote the suggestions. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

!Votes

3 -Hurricane21 (talk) 01:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

1; I don't think the damages are 4 billion or lower but I dought Sally caused any more damage than 8 billion - I like hurricanes (talk) 01:18, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm not going to vote until there is more of a consensus on the total losses from the storm. While most of the sources for Sally do list the damage estimates between $5-8 billion, either figure doesn't seem correct because it's a range. $7 billion doesn't really work either because of the same issue. For now, I think it is best to leave whatever damage estimate is currently listed for Sally (I think its 7 billion) as is until AON releases their report. Whatever that figure may be, should then be used as the final figure for Sally until the storm's TCR comes out in the spring. Gumballs678 talk 01:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Would prefer 3 (i.e. status quo) for the next 36 hours or so until the AON reports come out. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 09:50, 29 September 2020 (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.

New articles for storms

@Robloxsupersuperhappyface and ChessEric: Before making an article for future storms, please check to see if there is already an existing draft. It will get confusing if there were two Gamma articles / drafts at the same time!! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 00:59, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

There were multiple articles / drafts; very frustrating. Mine was deleted! Drdpw (talk) 01:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Drdpw: That is really frustrating, and contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. I suggest telling everyone on this talk page before going on and making a draft, since this can happen. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:14, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Drdpw, Destroyeraa, and Robloxsupersuperhappyface: To be fair, I started the article on the storm while it was still a depression and let Destroyeraa know when I did.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 01:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@ChessEric, Drdpw, and Robloxsupersuperhappyface: Yeah, ChessEric did. A lot of people created drafts, and that created a lot of confusion. So let's notify everyone on this talk page before starting a draft. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 02:11, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I didn’t remember to check, I did feel sick while making the article and my thinking was a bit blurry. So yeah we need a talk page on the main season article for drafts. Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 02:30, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Whoops just realized this was the main page lol Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 02:31, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Robloxsupersuperhappyface: Oh. I probably wouldn't have been as upset about how the article was written had I known that. Sorry! LOL!ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh it’s fine my body’s still feeling a bit warm but I don’t have a fever, I guess it’s just bad allergies lol, plus I think Gamma may make a second landfall in eastern Mexico so we will have to watch it closely. Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 02:38, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Robloxsupersuperhappyface: Feel better. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Feel better, watch out for Covid, and wear a mask in public! At least editing Wikipedia is safe, where us nerds have been social distancing since 2001 :P Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks I’m feeling better it’s just allergy season down in Texas is always violent Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

@Robloxsupersuperhappyface and Hurricanehink: Luckily COVID is low for us in New Jersey, but cold season is ramping up. Also, there’s an outbreak at the White House, which is currently being debated at ITN. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 16:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Texas is still a badly affected area. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Alright, switching back on topic, Gamma really needs expansion for a minimal Cat 1 hurricane (IMO). I'm not gonna go on my NHC rant here on WP, but you know what I feel about them an Gamma. Anyway, the preps and impact section and the MH really need to be expanded. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 20:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Correction–Gamma was a high end tropical storm. I'd argue it doesn't need an aticle, but Tropical Storm Vicky does as it claimed a life. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 13:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Just because a storm killed someone doesn't mean it needs an article. See WP:MEMORIAL. Also, Vicky caused the death while it was only a tropical wave. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Hurricanehink. Vicky is not a notable storm. And also Gamma was a hurricane but the NHC refused to recognize it as such, and will probably do in post analysis. Gamma still needs expansion.~ Destroyeraa🌀 16:08, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Fair points. However, I still have to say that then we don’t need a storm for Tropical Storm Arthur, which only did $112,000. Also they won’t say gamma is a hurricane as during the advisories winds were only 70mph. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 10:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Arthur has an article because of its impacts to land, despite not making landfall. The difference between say Arthur, Edouard, Rene, and Vicky, is that while they all impacted land in some way, the impacts all varied. Edouard hardly impacted Bermuda, Rene impacted the Cabo Verdes but that's typical of a CV seed. The same can be said for Vicky. Furthermore, as for the speculation on whether Gamma was a hurricane or not, just because in its final advisories its winds were 70 mph, does not mean it was not a hurricane. The NHC noted the storm was either at or just below hurricane intensity upon its landfall in Tulum. We can speculate all we want, but until the storm's TCR is released, it will remain a tropical storm. Gumballs678 talk 17:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Me thinking at 6:41 AM! Anyway, Arthur didn't claim a life; Vicky did. It's possible Gamma was a hurricane-at first we thought Michael was a category 4. It was then proved to be a category 5. Anyway, I see your CV claim thing. Arthur did $112,000—IMO that's minimal(below $500,000)but your entitled to your opinion.--67.85.37.186 (talk) 19:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Vicky's precursor caused a death, not the storm itself. Furthermore, Arthur was warranted an article because of its impacts, even if it did cause $112,000. There's not really a requirement for a storm to have an article, but typically, if a storm brings significant impacts to land, it will receive an article. Not always though. But, Vicky's impacts weren't significant enough to warrant an article. Gumballs678 talk 20:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2020

tropical storm gamma formed, needs to be 24 tropical storms 67.85.37.186 (talk) 01:17, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Done! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:19, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

TS Gamma warning cone

The current image for Gamma's forecast is pretty outdated, can we get a new image for the warning cone? Love and kisses and whatnot Gex4pls (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Gex4pls: I'm pretty sure the bot will update soon enough, but in the meantime, I'll ping @CoolStuffYT: to do the honors. And your last sentence, Gex4pls... ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa: Corrected it :) But the image seems to be too large... how can I fix that? 13:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Delta Article?

TS Delta should have an article since it is already a threat in Cuba. According to the funnel chart, Delta can be a hurricane and make landfall in Louisiana. If someone has made a draft, tell me so that I can help edit it. Aegeou2 (talk) 12:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree. It's already significant enough as a Greek name storm, and it's predicted to actually make landfall in a place that is not the Caribbean. Also yeah, it is a threat to multiple places already. I'm new and I don't know that much about how talk works so I hope I did it right. TriplyExpositioned (talk) 13:38, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I was just gonna create a draft has anybody created one though? Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I just created a draft Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 13:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't see any other drafts. My searches won't be that complete knowing that I'm new, but I have not found anything. TriplyExpositioned (talk) 13:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I was just about to thank @Robloxsupersuperhappyface: for making the draft, Draft:Tropical_Storm_Delta_(2020) Gex4pls (talk) 14:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Got it. Aegeou2 (talk) 16:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Nominated for ITN

The article, Tropical Storm Gamma (2020) has been nominated for Wikipedia's In The News portal. You can participate in the discussion Here. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:59, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2020

Currently according to Tropical Storm Beta, the article says it did over $1 million, but here it says unknown. Can we update it to say >$1 million? 67.85.37.186 (talk) 20:27, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Do we have a source for the $1 million? I haven't been able to find any that confirm the damage estimate. If there isn't one, the article needs to be updated to match the season effects to say "Unknown" until a confirmed source has a damage estimate. Gumballs678 talk 21:11, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure about this. I think that it should, but I do want others to have the opportunity to edit it up-to-date. Aegeou2 (talk) 23:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

It says over 1 million dollars on the article, but I'm not sure if there's a source. Pinging User: Destroyeraa for her input. Also pinging User: Robloxsupersuperhappyface.--67.85.37.186 (talk) 23:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

• Not done unless a source is given. There was no source on Beta's article, just an estimate by an unknown user, which has been removed. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Destroyeraa:Is Accuweather an acceptable source? Their damage estimate was 1 billion: Beta delivers deluge to Texas coastline, trapping motorists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gex4pls (talk • contribs)

@Gex4pls: Accuweather is not a reliable source for damage estimates. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh, alright then Gex4pls (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2020

It says on Hurricane Teddy it did minimal damage. I can agree, as it had limited impacts. Can we update the article to say that? 67.85.37.186 (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Inks.LWC (talk) 22:38, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Good or featured article

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.

---

After the 2020 season ends as the most active in history. Will it be tagged as a good or featured article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Modokai (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 05:56 October 8

Neither. A full rewrite will be needed to incorporate TCR information and post-storm damage assessments. Both good articles and featured articles are required to go through a review process in order to be promoted. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 06:16, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@Modokai: it may not be. We need four more tropical storms. It's getting late in the season, and the 2 waves have small chances of being Tropical Storm Epsilon. I'm not fully sure we'll be most active. You can't make assumptions. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 12:15, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Not very late. Also there might be more off-season storms in the season, since there already have been two. I believe we'll get to about Kappa before stuff become too cold for storms. 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 12:32, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@Chicdat: WP: OR. We might get to Kappa, Theta, Eta, Zeta, Epsilon or stay at Delta. We could even get down to pi! The point is, saying that it will break 2005 is original research. And giving how any organizing storm has to deal with dry air, if it can't form in 5 days, wind shear will tear it apart. That is the forecast. I can't see Epsilon forming until late October. We need to have an active November. Keep in mind; 2005 had 2 storms in December. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 12:35, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Please remember not to turn this discussion into a forum. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:09, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh no, we’re not. But we are breaching WP: OR, so the publisher got a {{uw-or1}} warning. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 18:25, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

You know, why don't we just close this discussion? 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 11:02, 9 October 2020 (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.

Semi-protected edit request on 8 October 2020

Delta currently says as of 4AM CDT 600 UTC but can we fix it so its the same???? 67.85.37.186 (talk) 14:03, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

•  Done ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:10, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Teddy and Paulette damage

According to AON, the damage for both Paulette and Teddy is stated as "millions". Currently, it is put as ≥$2 million. Should we change it to >$1 million, or keep it this way? ~ Destroyeraa🌀 19:14, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I think it should be >$1 million. "Millions" just implies more than $1 million, not necessarily that it's at least $2 million. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:15, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

OK, I didn't know that, feel free to change it to >$1 million then. Please don't forget to also update the hurricane pages themselves. Hurricane21 (talk) 19:17, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

"Xth named storm"

This may be kind of splitting hairs, but I notice in a number of articles for this year's storms, we mention that it is the earliest xth named storm, beating records set primary in 2005. But strictly speaking, it's not entirely correct for storms after the Azores subtropical storm. For example, Tammy was the nineteenth named storm, even though it was the twentieth tropical/subtropical storm. Should we change the wording accordingly, or is this too small of a distinction to make? TornadoLGS (talk) 03:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@TornadoLGS: Strictly speaking, the 2005 Azores storm is not named. However, the NHC counts it as a named storm. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I have gone through and fine-tuned the wording in the 2005 "post-Azores" storm articles regarding the breaking of records by 2020 storms for accuracy with citations. I have also tried to provide such nuanced and accurate statements with citations about the new storm formation records set this year in this article, and would suggest that the various individual storm articles use such wording too. Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 13:16, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

When accounting for the record on xth named storm, the Azores storm is counted. It's why, for example, Delta is the 25th named storm, but beat out Gamma, even through Gamma is the 24th name. Because the Azores storm is included in the tally, every storm after it is moved down a number. It's why Wilma in 2005 is the 22nd named storm, and not the 21st. Gumballs678 talk 15:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

To be clear, I'm not saying to adjust the numbers, but to label systems as "the earliest Xth tropical or subtropical storm," or something to that effect." TornadoLGS (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Articles (where they exist) for 2020 "earliest" storms through Sally can accurately state that they are "the earliest Xth named Atlantic storm." Articles for storms from Teddy on can accurately state that they are "the earliest Xth tropical or subtropical storm." Drdpw (talk) 17:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

@Drdpw: We can not and should not be calling a tropical cyclone the earliest Xth named Atlantic storm anymore as it isn't true and never has been as the NHC are not alone in naming storms over the Atlantic. The UKMO, MetEirrean, Meteo France and various other met services in Europed name storms that impact them and that's not to mention the German FU Berlin which names highs and lows over Europe including the Atlantic Ocean and are used by the German Weather Service.Jason Rees (talk) 18:26, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

So "earliest Xth tropical or subtropical storm," would indeed be more accurate. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:29, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Except you are assuming there that FU Berlin et all have never named a tropical or subtropical storm in the Atlantic - I have no evidence either way.Jason Rees (talk) 18:35, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

You mean an Atlantic tropical or subtropical cyclone recognized by Germany but not the NHC?TornadoLGS (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Not quite as I don't think that FU Berlin classifies areas of low pressure, as tropical, subtropical, extratropical, frontal etc, but instead names all lows/highs with the exception of this that are already named by NHC. I also note that they named Ilonas - Udine.Jason Rees (talk) 19:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

So wouldn't that make it appropriate to list storms by when they reached (sub)tropical storm status rather than when they were named, as I proposed? TornadoLGS (talk) 19:45, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 01:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

It also depends upon the way the record is phrased by reliable sources.Drdpw (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Jason Rees and Drdpw: Since the NHC is the RSMC for tropical cyclone naming in the Atlantic, it is safe to ignore the FU Berlin and still say “the earliest xth name tropical/subtropical Storm”. The WMO decides the beamed, and the NHC carries them out. These are the official names, not some other name other countries name them.~ Destroyeraa🌀 16:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Actually @Destroyeraa: The fact that the NHC is the RSMC for the region would not be an excuse for us not to mention any subtropical or tropical systems that FU Berlin, UKMO, Meteo France etc named or monitored especially as they are also official. Taking Alpha as a hypotethical example Portugal would have been well within their rights to name it Alex as a part of the [[European winname our storms project and we probably would have had to have the article at Subtropical Storm Alex per WP:Common Name. I also note that project consensus is very much against it since we mention PAGASA Names and as well as non RSMC storms around the world. However, we are getting off-topic here and my original point was that we can not say that something is the Nth named storm of 2020 in the Atlantic as FU Berlin, UKMO, Meteo France AEMET all name weather systems in the Atlantic and are official.Jason Rees (talk) 21:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, when backed by a reliable source, we can accurately state that "abcd was the earliest Xth named storm on record in the Atlantic hurricane season, surpassing ...". Drdpw (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

You are putting way to many qualifers in there and as i noted above, a named storm is not just tropical or subtropical cyclone anymore.Jason Rees (talk) 22:43, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

And again, this becomes a non-issue if we simply say "Xth tropical or subtropical storm" instead of "Xth named storm." TornadoLGS (talk) 22:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Record Set By Delta

Hurricane Delta is the 10th named storm to make US landfall in on year, breaking the record set in 1916. Mw843 (talk) 01:29, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, but that should be an edit request. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 01:52, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Already notes in the article. Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 01:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Delta Wind Glitch

NOAA, NHC And The Weather Channel (TWC) Has Officially Downgraded Delta To A Tropical Depression I Tried To Put Delta To 35 MPH But Just Stays At Storm! Hurricanestudier123 (talk) 15:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC) @Hurricanestudier123: There is no glitch; you have to change other parameters in the infobox. You need to have category= depression and type= tropical depression. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I Did It And Did Not Work Hurricanestudier123 (talk) 02:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2020

We need to update the Delta advisory from 7am to 10am. It's now a depression. 67.85.37.186 (talk) 16:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. "7am" doesn't appear anywhere in the article, nor is it clear what this even means. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

irrelevant now, but it was the 7am advisory, but it was supposed to be the 10am advisory. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 01:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Record activity

Would we be able to create a new section (or subsection, as in the article for the 2005 hurricane season) dedicated to discussing the records set or tied during the 2020 season? I feel there have been enough to justify this. Just a partial list I can think of, mostly mentioned somewhere in the article in its current state:

Seasonal records

1. Earliest named storms (including the table currently there)
2. Consecutive seasons with pre-season activity
3. Most active May
4. Most active July
5. Most active September
6. Most US landfalling tropical cyclones
7. Most Louisiana landfalling tropical cyclones
8. Most storms named in a single day (by the way, did the three in 1893 also occur within 6 hours, or were they only the same day?)

Individual storm records

1. Hurricane Laura: Strongest hurricane at landfall in Louisiana
2. Hurricane Paulette: Possible records including most other tropical cyclones forming during lifespan, also I think I saw something that had to do with its redevelopment
3. Hurricane Sally: Record one-day rainfall at Pensacola, FL (18.17 in)
4. Subtropical storm Alpha: Easternmost forming tropical or subtropical cyclone
5. Subtropical storm Alpha: First tropical or subtropical cyclone to make landfall in mainland Portugal
6. Hurricane Delta: Fastest intensification from tropical depression to category 4 hurricane (28 hours) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mvhcmaniac (talk • contribs) 17:52, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

@Mvhcmaniac: There doesn't need to be an entire section for records because most of them can either be included in the storm's article--or on the storm's summary if it does not an article. Because many of these are trivial, an entire section is unnecessary. And most of them are summarized in the lead. Gumballs678 talk 18:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Too trivial so I removed it. 🌀HurricaneJanor (talk) 02:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

@Mvhcmaniac: Maybe we could add this for post season shenanigans, but we should probably wait until the season is over. Also, I don't believe data from the 19th century is usually acceptable, (though maybe I'm just an idiot) so you're probably good on the wind thing. Gex4pls (talk) 02:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC) @Mvhcmania, Gumballs678, HurricaneJanor, and Gex4pls: I numbered the records. For the season records, 1 was already listed, 2, 3, and 4 are all trivial, 5 is ok, 6 is ok, 7 is too trivial, 8 is original research. For the individual storm records, 1 is probably already listed, 2 is too trivial, 3 is absolutely not important, 4 is already put, and 5 is already in the article. 6 is also in the article. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 02:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Damage

See [7]. Sally damage at least $8 billion, Isaias close to $6 billion, Laura is at most $12 billion. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 23:08, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

We already determined the damage from AON, a mostly reliable source. We don’t use disaster philanthropy. Ask @Hurricane21: for questions. Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC) ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:41, 10 October 2020 (UTC)