User talk:Undescribed

This is my talk page, you can post any comments you have below this line...§§§§§§§§§§

A page you started (1996 Kamianske tram accident) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating 1996 Kamianske tram accident, Undescribed!

Wikipedia editor NearEMPTiness just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

This is a very informative article. For me, it looked as if the brakes had only failed at the bottom of the hill, although I assume that the break failure had already occured before, resulting in the excessive speed.

To reply, leave a comment on NearEMPTiness's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Undescribed. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Can you try to find and upload an image of the blizzard that affected the Northeast today? I think NASA/NOAA has a few of them IIRC. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 22:28, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find an image from NASA's Earth Observatory, however I couldn't find a time stamp for the image. File:The February 2017 United States blizzard 09-02-17.jpg --Undescribed (talk) 00:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bologna massacre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Terrestrial (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Revert

The other sections in the list (sans maybe the wettest tropical cyclone stuff since there could be other systems not listed that we don't know of) are less ranky and don't imply that we can prove the storm was the strongest X storm in cases where it can not be proven. Even then, how important is listing the lowest pressures per month, especially when you consider that the pressure database in the EPAC is largely empty prior to 1988. Should we have a section for highest pressure per category? What about highest pressure of each storm in a month? Where do you draw the line? Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 19:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm a little bit confused because in regards to your first point, because you mention how it doesn't seem important to list the lowest pressures per month. However if this is the case, why is that section still included in the list right now? As for the "highest pressure" categories, it seems as though including that category would be pretty pointless, because across the board on Wikipedia, you never hear any mention of a storms notability for having a high barometric pressure, unlike with low barometric pressures, due to the fact that low pressures typically correspond with very intense storms. --Undescribed (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant lower pressure per category, not month, which I'd argue is a bit arbitrary for the same reason a ranking of storms with the highest pressure for a given category would be (you never really hear of a storm notable for a having a certain pressure for being a certain category, higher or lower). Not the mention the fact the categories in the SSHWS are somewhat randomly divided, as well as the fact that most storms with known low/high pressure have been measured by reconnaissance rather than estimated by satellite. which only make the records more trivial. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 20:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point, but honestly I've never really heard of storms being ranked as the "strongest by month" (by pressure) outside of Wikipedia either. It still makes me wonder why this sub-section should be included, but not the sub-section ranking storms that are "strongest by category." Undescribed (talk) 21:52, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with that assessment, given the NHC mentions these sorts of records in TCR, like here or here. Y E ^Pacific ^Hurricane 02:05, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Yellow Evan: Well the article Hurricane Opal mentions in the first sentence that it had the lowest barometric pressure for any Atlantic hurricane that did not reach Category 5 strength. Is that not a reasonable statement? Undescribed (talk) 03:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]