Jump to content

Talk:2021 Atlantic hurricane season

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HurricaneResearch (talk | contribs) at 12:26, 3 October 2021. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Auxiliary List

I have a question should we add the Auxiliary list since we are 2 names away from it or is it too soon still? Wikihelp7586 (Talk) 23:56, 24 September 2021

I think we should do something like we did last year and add maybe the first six names from the list. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:11, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

→ Link to last year's discussion: Talk:2020 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 1#Greek letter names in Storm names section

Perhaps add a portion of the list but keep the unused names hidden until active. Drdpw (talk) 00:20, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@TornadoLGS and Drdpw I agree with you guys we should add some of the names on there like last year. Wikihelp7586 (Talk) 00:30, 25 September 2021
Yes we should add it and after the end of the season we can remove all the unused names. Hurricane4235 (talk) 10:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In Pacific typhoon articles, the first ten names of the auxiliary list are shown year-round. Perhaps we should do the same? 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 10:59, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
With only two names left on the original list, we should follow the procedure we did last year and add the list, but keep all but a few names hidden until more form. For example, we could show the first six and if the list extends past say that 3rd or 4th name in the aux list, then reveal another set. Gumballs678 talk 21:15, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2 is very close to running of standard names so I think we should add auxiliary list names HurricaneResearch (talk) 22:45, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Going by last year's practice, this is what should be added:
Auxiliary list
  • Adria (unused)
  • Braylen (unused)
  • Caridad (unused)
  • Deshawn (unused)
  • Emery (unused)
  • Foster (unused)
If there are no objections, and if no one beats me to it, this is what I will add to the article (I will probably hold off until tomorrow, before implementing). Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 00:05, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thx for presenting that here and making us sure that there will actually be a auxiliary list HurricaneResearch (talk) 01:02, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we use half of the auxiliary names, the last few auxiliary will be published. HurricaneResearch ([[User talk: HurricaneResearch | talk ] ] ) 01:45, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneResearch: That is incorrect. If we get to the 6th auxiliary name shown we will post the next 3 auxiliary names to the page (keeping the 3-column format). Drdpw (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Off topic comments

Compared to the standard names, The auxiliary names are strange and are not common HurricaneResearch (talk) 01:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Especially Caridad on the first 6 names of the list Kangsea0 (talk) 19:49, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add a Wikipedia page for Hurricane Sam (2021)

Do you guys think should we make a page on Wikipedia for Sam? Since it a Cat 4 and Other major storms do have a page (example: Grace, Ida and Larry). HurricaneResearch (talk) 22:49, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneResearch: Hey there! It doesn't seem to be needed quite yet, as there are no forecasted or known impacts at the time, whereas there were for Grace, Ida, and Larry. If there end up being impacts from Sam, we could create an article then. codingcyclone please ping/my wreckage 23:00, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@codingcyclone My thoughts on the location the impact will be happening is in the Northern Leeward Islands and Bermuda HurricaneResearch (talk) 23:47, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneResearch: Per WP:FORUM, this is not the place to speculate on impact locations. Creating an article based on such speculation would violate WP:CRYSTAL. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let just wait until Sam dissipate and all the information gathered in we will actually see the impact locations HurricaneResearch (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there at least maybe a draft for Sam currently? Kaiser Jaguar (talk) 00:47, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@KaiserJaguar No. I sent a draft but sadly they reviewed it and Rejected. HurricaneResearch (talk) 01:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They reviewed it hours after I sent it HurricaneResearch (talk) 01:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I Did It! My draft on Hurricane Sam is public now but it a work in progress draft. What in the draft are the current details not the final details so I will finish it when Sam dissipate HurricaneResearch ([[User talk: HurricaneResearch | talk ] ] ) 12:42, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My draft is not the most reliable. It will be finished as soon as Sam dissipates HurricaneResearch (talk) 14:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Too soon Realistically, we should wait until Tuesday (or probably later) to even begin a draft. Sure, Sam's meteorological history is quite interesting, but until we get some clear picture of possible land impacts, I'm opposed to creating a draft just yet, even if Sam does something notable (e.g. become a Category 5). I say Tuesday because by then we can definitely determine where Sam may go (in regards to the Leeward Islands), or most likely much later when a clear path for Sam is beginning to set in stone (in regards to Bermuda/U.S. East Coast/Atlantic Canada). Kaiser Jaguar (talk) 15:06, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. News reports say that Sam will be a long lived storm and say that Sam can live until next weekend or Friday HurricaneResearch (talk) 18:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneResearch: A tropical cyclone being long-lived is not merit enough for an article. For a tropical cyclone to have its own article, it needs to have a clear amount of impacts and coverage in reliable sources (e.g. Tropical Storm Fay (2020)) or be meteorologically notable (e.g. Hurricane Grace (1991)). At present, Sam is neither of these since it didn't break any meteorological records, and, as far as we know, didn't cause any impacts. If, later, it breaks a significant record or has impacts somewhere, we can create an article then. Thank you. codingcyclone please ping/my wreckage 18:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneResearch: Agreed with CodingCyclone. We also do not create articles based on what a storm is forecast to do, only what it actually does. Again see WP:CRYSTAL and TOOSOON. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If Sam does become a Category 5 (which is possible at this stage), would that be notably enough meteorologically to render a draft? (While I'd disagree with this sentiment, I'd understand if a draft was made in such scenario). Kaiser Jaguar (talk) 20:16, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Kaiser Jaguar[reply]
It would not be. If Sam were to become a category 5, while it would be in rare company in its current area, that itself is not enough to warrant a draft creation. We need to wait and see what potential impacts Sam has on Bermuda and Eastern North America before we discuss further a draft. Gumballs678 talk 22:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Someone replaced my draft with a Redirect page HurricaneResearch (talk) 22:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If your the one who did that then your not allowed to do it any more HurricaneResearch (talk) 22:52, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HurricaneResearch: The consensus is currently against having an article for Sam until it has notable effects. You are a new editor and you haven't really learned the ropes. You certainly don't get to decide what other editors are or aren't allowed to do. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:02, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did that, and did so on the basis of what I and our fellow editors have said above. Drdpw (talk) 23:06, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Drdpw: An article cooking in draftspace doesn't do any harm. There's no need to blank/redirect it, especially if its contents can later be used in an actual article. By the looks of it, most of the above have agreed that an article can wait, and they are correct. However, this does not bar anyone from writing a draft at Draft:Hurricane Sam. What would be against consensus would be someone writing an article at Hurricane Sam instead. @HurricaneResearch: Right now, editors are agreeing that an article is not deserved. As such, it is highly suggested that you do not submit the draft unless it has established notability. Draft submissions have a limit; a draft can be barred from entering namespace if declined too many times. I've restored the draft for now, but I still suggest holding off on submitting until much later when the storm has a sizable impact. Chlod (say hi!) 23:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneResearch: An additional note: consider using existing storm articles as a basis for your draft. In addition, you may want to format the draft in a way that abides by the WikiProject Tropical cyclones style guide. Chlod (say hi!) 23:36, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hold off the submission and submit once I got enough notability details on the other hand if it not notable when it dissipate I will delete the draft HurricaneResearch ([[User talk: HurricaneResearch | talk ] ] ) 19:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For now, let's not make a article, until either it hits Bermuda and has significant damage there, or hits Atlantic Canada. But it's too early to tell whether we make a article, because it has not impacted land, except for rip currents. It will miss Bermuda at a direct hit so far by the forecasts, but Atlantic Canada is not ruled out yet. Let's wait until it will be a strike for land, but so far, the article about Hurricane Sam can't be published yet. Kangsea0 (talk) 00:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it reaches category 5 (unlikely) could the page be created? This type is rare. André L P Souza (talk) 19:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned above, probably not. The closest analog I can think of is Hurricane Lorenzo (2019), but that one is more notable because it was the easternmost Atlantic Category 5 storm on record, it produced fatalities, and it impacted Europe as a post-tropical cyclone. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If Sam doesn’t have any casualties in Bermuda (I say Bermuda because warnings are issued there already) then I will delete the draft HurricaneResearch ([[User talk: HurricaneResearch | talk ] ] ) 00:22, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I say that Sam's meteorological history is quite interesting and worthy enough for an article (It is becoming a pretty long lasting major hurricane, and could reach the Top 10 for ACE count for Atlantic hurricanes). I think maybe it'll be best to release this much later (in case of impacts to Greenland/Iceland/UK/Mainland Europe), but I think it has far more meat for a notable article than something like Tropical Storm Danny (2021) that actually has an article. Kaiser Jaguar (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2021 (UTC) Kaiser Jaguar[reply]

@KaiserJaguar Sam is a long lasting hurricane. Larry lasted 13 days earlier this year and Sam is 12 days. HurricaneResearch ( talk ) 16:16, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Knowledgekid87: In my opinion that's not an excuse to leave Sam with no article, there are plenty of "fish" tropical cyclones within the past that has their own articles. Kaiser Jaguar (talk) 02:24, 3 October 2021 (UTC) Kaiser Jaguar[reply]
other stuff exists is not a valid argument. The point about notability, or lack thereof, is valid. Drdpw (talk) 03:10, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes,@Kaiser Jaguar: but any storms that you mention all had at least some sort of historical significance or damage and impacts, or had some sort of record broken that made them notable. While a hurricane like Sam might be interesting for becoming so strong over the open ocean, it hasn't really done any sort of damage or done anything that would really warrant an article at this time. See WP:GNG, and WP:WikiProject Tropical cyclones#Article guidlines. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 03:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sam has weakened to a Category 2 after a whole week of being a major storm but it still can last for a few more days and it lifespan currently is tied with Hurricane Larry (2021). HurricaneResearch ([[User talk: HurricaneResearch | talk ] ] ) 12:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mindy article

Discussion's gone stale. As with any other storm, if you want a Mindy article, create a draft and see if it meets notability requirements and is a decent prose. JayTee🕊️ 00:29, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Why hasn’t there been an article on tropical storm Mindy yet? Though Mindy was short lived, It still had some effects on land and is notable enough that it should have it’s own article. IBlazeCat (talk) 22:30, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mindy did hit land (Florida) but I would consider notable if it was hurricane strength. HurricaneResearch (talk ) 22:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose Mindy doesn't need an article as it was a tropical storm. If it was a hurricane then an article could have been made. Hurricane4235 (talk) 04:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The issue with an article for Mindy is there isn't enough prose to put into an article. It rapidly organized, made landfall, and then rapidly dissipated just as fast. Impacts were minimal. Gumballs678 talk 11:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with Gumballs. Mindy doesn't need an article. Hurricane4235 (talk) 13:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mindy doesn't need an article, its impacts were weak and not enough to publish one. It was short-lived as well; and maximum sustained winds were only at 45 mph. Kangsea0 (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support/Question See, I would support this stance; the problem is that there was precedent before for previous short-lived tropical storms that caused some light damage in the United States (e.g. Tropical Storm Bertha (2020) and Tropical Storm Danny (2021)). If Danny was short-lived (and caused minimal damage) was enough to warrant an article, why not Mindy? Kaiser Jaguar (talk) 23:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC) Kaiser Jaguar[reply]

Good question. Compared to Danny this year, I would support this idea, however, the data on the 2021 Atlantic Hurricane Season shows unknown. On the other hand, Mindy was quick, and could've caused the same amount of damage compared to Danny, which was minimal. Danny, tracked near Atlanta, Georgia and produced heavy rain. Mindy, hit Tallahassee, Florida and Jacksonville, Florida. But if there is enough evidence for this and more explanation, a article of Mindy could be created. Kangsea0 (talk) 00:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... All of you are giving good points.. My strong oppose is being changed to Weak Oppose as a Mindy article would be very small. Hurricane4235 (talk) 03:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is unnecessary, if someone wants there to be a Mindy article, create a draft and find as much info as you can; if the prose looks long and well-written enough to you in the end then publish it. And @Hurricane4235:, see Tropical Storm Allison and Tropical Storm Imelda if you think tropical storms aren't as notable as hurricanes. JayTee🕊️ 12:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhh... But both of them were costly enough to have its own article. Was Mindy any close?? Thats why I don't want a Mindy article. But you can create a draft. Hurricane4235 (talk) 13:05, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It boils down to – was Mindy a noteworthy storm in terms of duration, track, intensity, damage, and/or fatalities? In my estimation the answer is no. As I read in a news article I read out of Jacksonville, Mindy was no worse than the average summer thunderstorm. Drdpw (talk) 14:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hurricane4235:, I agree with @Drdpw and you on this; my point is that literally any storm (even if not a hurricane) can have a draft created for it, so if someone wanted a Mindy article they should be the ones to make it and do the research. However, not all storms are notable, so Mindy might not even form a long enough prose length to warrant one. JayTee🕊️ 16:43, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, the best course of action will probably be to just wait until the TCR report, and all damage estimates and everything else is finalized. I think it is just honestly the only true thing we can do here, once we have the report we can truly determine whether or not an article will be warranted. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 02:35, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Sam peak intensity

Consensus for 135 kt/929 mbar. Edit war resolved. Destroyer (Alternate account) 20:33, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

A NOAA Hurricane Hunter aircraft investigating Sam this afternoon and evening found that the major hurricane likely peaked in intensity at around 135 kt with a central pressure of about 929 mb between 1900-2200 UTC when the eye contracted down to about 7 nmi in diameter.

*Oppose For reasons stated by Noah, if the NHC wanted this to be the actual peak used they would have put it in the best track, as they did with an 05Z point on Nicholas' BT.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AveryTheComrade (talk • contribs)

  • Say “The NHC estimated peak winds of 155 mph, pending a post-season analysis.” That is what the “likely” means, that it is their best estimate, and we will find out if they stand by that in a few months. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 03:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – (Edit conflict): I'm more in support of this than against it, because 1) the NHC didn't have recon in the storm at the time of the storm's peak intensity (by hours) and they admitted that it was stronger in between flights, 2) the NHC said that it was "likely" - while not definitive, we can always change the peak values once the TCR comes out, and 3) this is basically the word of the NHC, so it's as reliable as we can get regarding the authority of the sources. Also, as Jasper Deng said off-wiki, we did something similar for Hurricane Andres (2015). LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the event that there is no consensus to use the estimated values in the infobox, I feel that we are obligated to mention them in the storm's MH (in the season article, and in any article it gets), per Hurricanehink's proposal. Completely ignoring them would be a violation of WP:BALANCE and WP:COVERAGE. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support using this as the peak. It's unusual, but they made it clear the intensity was prior to the advisory and went out of their way to give a value. They could have just said "Sam likely peaked in intensity earlier in the day" and not give values. All intensities are approximate so focusing on "likely" as a reason to not use it doesn't really make sense. It's the same for every operational intensity, it's subject to change in post. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 03:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I'm kind of on the fence about this. Mainly because "likely" is not certain. In cases of uncertainty like this, I would prefer to lowball it since we can at least be sure it attained 130 kt, even if we're less sure it reached 135. Though on the matter of BT, would it not show up, since that dataset uses synoptic points at 18:00 and 00:00 while this apparent peak was between 19:00 and 22:00? In that case, the peak would be comparable to what happened with Lorenzo. If we keep the peak at 130, there should be a note mentioning the possibility of 135. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:35, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Cyclonebiskit. Also, "100% confirmed 130 knot peak" does not make sense, because the statements "the peak intensity of Sam was 130 kt" and "the peak intensity of Sam was 135 kt" are mutually exclusive and the 135 kt sentence thus asserts that a 130-knot peak is not confirmed.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Likely is not that certain, It could intensify more. So lets wait until Sam dissipates. Hurricane4235 (talk) 04:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for putting 155 mph as the peak intensity. do agree this is a pretty "LAME" conflict. NHC is a reliable source, they claimed Sam was 155 mph at peak, although not fitting into the 6 hour period (analogous to something like Hurricane Lorenzo (2019) 5 mph stronger than Ida and both the same pressure, thus, Sam shall be the strongest for now unless post-analysis states otherwise. It would be more of a strong case if there was an asynoptic point added to the best track around 20z, although thats yet to happen, but the reference from the National Hurricane Center, an obviously reliable source which goes higher priority than ATCF, I think is already strong enough of a case for now. Not sure why it has to be so complicated. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 05:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am in support of the 155/929 peak for Sam as the NHC still lists this intensity as Sam’s peak, even if there is a degree of uncertainty. Until the NHC revises their peak estimate either in post-season analysis or in a future forecast discussion, this peak intensity should stand. If this peak is ultimately not listed, then there should at least be a note including this estimated intensity as Sam’s likely peak. The shyguy (talk) 05:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

@Modokai: It is pretty WP:LAME to be edit warring over the "strongest storm" parameter; assuming the above discussion favors using the 135 kt and 929 mb peak intensity, the established convention with storms tied in pressure here (929 mb) is to choose the one(s) with the highest winds, in which case Sam is used.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:49, 27 September 2021 (UTC) So is Ida the strongest storm or Sam?? Hurricane4235 (talk) 04:53, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricane4235: Sam, by NHC's current opinion.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:01, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recon was not there when during Sam's peak so it is possible it might have been stronger than Ida as the NHC did mention that in the discussion, so I guess we'll just have to wait until the tropical cyclone report comes out. Hurricane 8021 (talk) 04:58, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricane4235: For now it is Sam by the NHC'S estimate. Hurricane 8021 (talk) 05:03, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is Sam but idk why many ppl are saying that Ida is the strongest storm of the season. Hurricane4235 (talk) 05:05, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly its similar to Patrica(2015). NHC didn't have observations at the time of its peak and they noted it could have had a lower pressure then typhoon Tip. Sam is similar where it peaked between flights and then had a eyewall replacement cycle. Until post-season or a stronger storm by wind or pressure forms Sam officially is the strongest storm of the year HavocPlayz (talk) 09:59, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricane4235: I think it's pretty clear why people keep putting it back to Ida. The intensities given in the forecast advisories give a peak of 130 kt and 938 mb. The 135 kt and 929 mbar (in which case I guess wind is the tiebreaker) is only mentioned in the discussion. Since this sort of thing is cause for confusion, perhaps we should include a note like this next to the intensity in the infobox: [note 1]. Also, to the newer editors in this thread, if you are replying to a previous comment, please indent your comment with the appropriate number of :'s to make the thread easier to read. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:03, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think this discussion can be concluded. The best track now explicitly shows a peak of 135kt/929 mb at 18z on September 16. Sourced from: [2]

(AL, 18, 2021092618, , BEST, 0, 140N, 503W, 135, 929, HU, 34, NEQ, 80, 80, 60, 70, 1013, 120, 10, 160, 0, L, 0, , 0, 0, SAM, D, 12, NEQ, 150, 90, 90, 120, genesis-num, 038,) Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 01:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

it seen Hurricane Sam peak at 135/929, per NHC Best track i thick this is now clearly 

AL, 18, 2021092618,   , BEST,   0, 140N,  503W, 135,  929, HU,  34, NEQ,   80,   80,   60,   70, 1013,  120,  10, 160,   0,   L,   0,    ,   0,   0,        SAM, D, 12, NEQ,  150,   90,   90,  120, genesis-num, 038, 
AL, 18, 2021092618,   , BEST,   0, 140N,  503W, 135,  929, HU,  50, NEQ,   40,   30,   25,   30, 1013,  120,  10, 160,   0,   L,   0,    ,   0,   0,        SAM, D, 12, NEQ,  150,   90,   90,  120, genesis-num, 038,

HurricaneEdgar 01:25, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 September 2021 (4)

Can I edit Tropical Storm Peter? Something is wrong with Peter, at the very end. Explanation: Peter has a 50/50 chance to redevelop, and so far someone has edited that it has a chance to redevelop, but it is too early to know. Text evidence: On September 25, the NHC began monitoring an area of disorganized showers and thunderstorms south of Bermuda associated with the remnants of Peter for potential development. (From wikipedia, Tropical Storm Peter 2021 Atlantic Hurricane Season) And editing Sam and possible Victor and Wanda. Will be back tomorrow.

 Done On the matter of Peter. @Kangsea0: Edit requests are not requests for permission to edit, however. They are requests for specific edits to be made if you do not have the rights given the protection level. They should usually be given in the format of "Add/remove X" or "Change A to B." TornadoLGS (talk) 01:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In a day or two we will be able to add a sentence stating something to the effect that A) remnants had deteriorated; or, B) the remnants reorganized, becoming Tropical Depression Peter. Until then, the text quoted is all that really needs to be stated. Drdpw (talk) 01:29, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Drdpw: The remnants of Peter reforming into a possible tropical depression is decreasing, so maybe we might edit after the storm fully dissipates, or if it forms, (a small window is still open for forming) then we can edit after the storm forms. It is likely that the remnants of Peter will dissipate, as same as Tropical Storm Odette. (2021) Kangsea0 (talk) 19:51, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it appears that increased wind shear and cooler ocean temperatures will soon put an end to any chance for development. Drdpw (talk) 20:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copied

PlanetsForLife 15:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical depression Twenty

The current tropical depression cannot be called twenty, because cyclone Teresa was not a tropical cyclone, but a subtropical one. André L P Souza (talk) 18:42, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@André L P Souza: Tropical and subtropical cyclones are given numbers in the same sequence. Teresa was 19L, regardless of whether it was tropical or subtropical. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:53, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TornadoLGS thanks for the report. Unfortunately, the page is blocked and I won't be able to update anything here or copy it to Lusophone Wikipedia. André L P Souza (talk) 19:04, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Unfortunately, I am unable to copy the contents here to update the Lusophone Wikipedia. Because of this, I won't be able to add Depression 20 content or update Sam's information. What happened to them taking this extreme measure? André L P Souza (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@André L P Souza: There was an edit war involving some autoconfirmed editors, prompting extended confirmed protection, though I think the duration may have been a bit excessive. You can still get the necessary details for the Portuguese page by clicking "View Source." TornadoLGS (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TornadoLGS thanks for helping me. It's just that I'm most familiar with the advanced version and the Wikipedia application. On the Portuguese page, just Dbastro and I updated it. André L P Souza (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cite error: There are <ref group=note> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=note}} template (see the help page).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2021_Atlantic_hurricane_season&oldid=1047944740"