Jump to content

Talk:Hurricane Delta

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 182.239.85.76 (talk) at 12:32, 11 October 2020 (Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020 (2): new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Protect this page

Vandals are attacking this page. Protect it. 71.172.254.114 (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey User:LightandDark2000 and User:ChessEric I see you guys blocked the vandal but why you guys also block me to I'm editing? I was trying to do good things! 71.172.254.114 (talk) 20:27, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That was actually an administrator, not me. Sorry, but that vandal was IP hopping (he already used two separate IPs), so the Semi-Protection was necessary. And since they are much too wide to be covered by a rangeblock, the only way to ensure that the vandalism stopped for good was a Semi-Protection. The protection was not meant to target editors like you, but unfortunately, that is a side effect of actions like this. It will automatically expire in 3 days. If you register with an account, you will be able to edit articles with this level of protection after you reach autoconfirmed status. Alternatively, you can suggest what edits you want made here, and we'll be more than happy to implement them for you. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 20:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Class

How can this not be at least C class? It's a fairly long article that's well-referenced. Jim Michael (talk) 14:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The impact section is less than impressive. There needs to be more information about Mexico, Cuba, and the United States. In addition, Delta should make landfall soon which should add more impacts. A rush of addition of impacts will mean lesser-quality writing. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:13, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Peak intensity

I was hoping this wouldn't happen because it was going to be annoying to add in, but it has, so I'm going to lay it out.

Delta reached a peak 3 different times. The first was when it reached Category 4 intensity (130 mph; 954 mb). The second came shortly after the first (145 mph; 956 mb). The final came this morning (120 mph; 953 mb). How do we list this in the article? I'm not going to act like I know how right now.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 16:46, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We usually go by peak wind speed. It's the same deal as with Hurricane Sandy, which had its maximum winds and lowest pressure on different dates. TornadoLGS (talk) 16:53, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The lowest pressure is officially the peak intensity, since the intensity of a TC is based on its pressure. In this case, the pictures of peak intensity all have a blob of a system that is ugly and small. The one with the lowest pressure actually has an eye. Per WP:WPTC/S, we don't always have to put the peak intensity as the picture. An important stage in the TC's lifespan, such as landfall, lowest pressure, the best "looks" (eye formation) also is fine. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:09, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An also, the NHC redacted its peak intensity on the besttrack, and the peak intensity is now 120 kt (140 mph). ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, we list both the maximum winds and the lowest pressure for the peak, even if they dad different time. Again, see Hurricane Sandy. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:25, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is true TornadoLGS. I was mistaken, I was thinking about the image in the infobox. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 18:29, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We usually go by minimum central pressure when referring to the storm's peak intensity. But given this storm's unique behavior (including the mismatch between the intervals with maximum winds and lowest pressure), I think it would be well worth mentioning each of the storm's 3 peaks in the lead. As for the main infobox image, I personally prefer the image of the 3rd peak - it looks better and the storm is at its lowest recorded pressure at that point. We have no hardline policy regarding the main images, but even following WPTC precedent, Delta is not a clear-cut case. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 20:24, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As @LightandDark2000: said, we should mention all three peaks, since a Delta is such an unique storm. I do feel that the NHC will revise the peak intensity, as they already did on the BT (it was downgraded to 120 kt, 140 mph, but protocol requires us to follow the advisories until the TCR comes out). However, as the storm isn’t done now, it’s a bit too soon for us to put it. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 21:06, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If we go by peak pressure rather than peak wind speed, then why does Hurricane Sandy's infobox image show it at peak wind speed? Is it because it was going through extratropical transition at that peak? TornadoLGS (talk) 18:02, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, that was Sandy's actual peak. Sandy's minimum pressure of 940 mbars also coincided with the time at which it reached Category 2 intensity, a pattern that is typical of most tropical cyclones. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The TCR for Sandy shows peak wind speed on October 25 at 100 knots with pressure at 954 mbar. The 940 mbar pressure was on October 29 when winds were 80 knots. The page satellite image shows it at the earlier peak. So, either that image should be changed, or we can show Delta at its initial 120-knot peak. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we don't have a hard requirement here to do either in the case of such mismatches. And Sandy was undergoing extratropical transition when it reached its peak (as measured by pressure), which is probably one of the reasons why the October 29 image wasn't used. And I see an inconsistency in the Sandy article. I'm going to have to correct that. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:54, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for ITN

@Robloxsupersuperhappyface, ChessEric, Sausius, and Elijahandskip: Feel free to chip in and give in your two cents.~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:31, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the ITN caption should be “After causing havoc in the resort city of Cancun, Hurricane Delta moves ashore in Louisiana as a Category 2 hurricane causing widespread destruction.” Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 23:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, I think putting Delta ITN would be a great idea. Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 23:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's too dramatic. You don't need the "havoc" part.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChessEric and Robloxsupersuperhappyface: Feel free to put your opinions on the ITN page. Also, removed the "havoc" and replaced with "heavy damage".~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:43, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well havoc is a little too dramatic but mention the trapping of many tourists in the region. Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 23:45, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to discuss the blurb, please do so at WP:In the news/Candidates#Hurricane Delta Robloxsupersuperhappyface and ChessEric. Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:50, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Destroyeraa: Oh. Sorry. Didn't know. LOL!

Requesting Edit

I would like to request an change to be made to Delta's article as it states that Delta was the first Greek named system to make landfall on the U.S in the "Records" section, although Beta was actually the first Greek named tropical cyclone to make landfall on the U.S, which is stated in its own article. Im just requesting an edit so that any readers that will read this aren't misinformed and become confused.WarDestroyer88 (talk)WarDestroyer88) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WarDestroyer88 (talkcontribs) 00:50, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:21, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delta Landfall

I’ve noticed that the article says first Greek storm to make landfall on the us. In fact it’s the second, beta was the first Greek to hit us. Although it is the first Greek hurricane landfall on us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.109.93 (talk) 06:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:33, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? --67.85.37.186 (talk) 23:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The aforementioned statement is no longer in the article; it was/is a trivial fact, not a record. Drdpw (talk) 00:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arkansas

If Arkansas is significantly affected, the article should mention it. Jim Michael (talk) 14:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim Michael: Damage reports are on the way. How about you go and find some, and add them to the article, if you have time. Thanks! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:11, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Effects in Louisiana article

Once they find the damage, we should make an article for affects in Louisiana if severe. The storm struck as a category 2 and whizzed through the state. --67.85.37.186 (talk) 01:12, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Currently not enough information and deaths auto warrant an article. Maybe as the storm reports come out, we shall consider. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020

In Meteorological history, please change {{convert|145|mph|abbr=on}} to 145 mph (230 km/h). We didn't use convert since it is unable to round off to the nearest 5. 219.78.190.20 (talk) 03:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done The convert template does have a rounding feature, which does allow for rounding to the nearest 5. It doesn't work properly in this case, though, since both values are converted from knots. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:49, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Template:convert can be set to round off numbers. Presently, the template's "round" parameter is set to "5" and the visible text reads: 145 mph (235 km/h). Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 04:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I changed to the requested value, since the official wind speed was posted as 125 knots, which rounds to 230 km/h. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020 (2)

Record section: tying the record set in 2002. 182.239.85.76 (talk) 12:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]