Talk:1970 Pacific typhoon season

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Todo[edit]

It needs at least a one sentence description of every storm to be a start.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Weird infobox[edit]

Around three months ago, these infoboxes had a complete sense of information, but by early February, the infoboxes almost went blank, leaving the dates behind. Any problem regarding those infoboxes?--Sir Jazer 13 (talk) 02:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

They just need to be updated to the new infoboxes Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
I updated them. --Dil Hoom Hoom Kare 19:27, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Nice Work. Jason Rees (talk) 19:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 14:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hurricane Dot basin crosser?[edit]

@Typhoon2013: @Supportstorm: @Cyclonebiskit: @Yellow Evan: @Jason Rees: @Hurricanehink: @Meow: Digging up some info on JMA Best Track, I found it:

66666 7013    3      7013 1 0 DOT                          20131122           
70090206 002 7 311 1802 1010                                                    
70090212 002 9 323 1800 1004                                                    
70090218 002 9 332 1801 1002                                                  

It seems that for JMA, Hurricane Dot briefly crossed the Dateline into WPAC on September 02, crossing back to CPAC later that day. I know that the basin boundaries were different that time, but since Dot is included on JMA BT and this makes it a official WPAC tropical cyclone, the storm should be included on this article. The fact that Dot was considered to be at least a named tropical storm should call for its own section and infobox, but there is little information about the storm and they didn't include its winds, so I don't know how to proceed. ABC paulista (talk) 19:20, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

It should be included in an "Other storms" section. When this season is eventually done, I'm sure some of the short-lived depressions could be merged into an "Other storms" section due to lack of information. It'll be much nicer to look at when this happens, but for now, that's why the article is stub-class. I'm a firm believer in using "Other storms" for any questionable and/or short-lived storms. I'd rather the page look nice than be a stickler for making sure every storm has their own section, which doesn't benefit anyone if it's presented poorly. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
@Hurricanehink: Even official, named storms? ABC paulista (talk) 20:20, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
If a named storm is in a basin for 24 hours, and the origins and history is already covered in another article, then there is no need to go into extra detail here. Sure, Dot was part of the Pacific typhoon season, so it should get a mention, but there's no need for redundant information on Wikipedia. It's better to have all of the information in one location. For most storms, that would be a storm article, but when storms don't have enough info to have an article, then we have to decide in the season articles how best to provide the information. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
As you well know @ABC paulista: I agree with Hurricanehink's view that a system that is in a basin for less than say 48 hours then it should be covered in Other Systems rather than given a whole section but the time limit is flexible. For example Tait spent about 72 hours in the South Pacific baisn recently, but it is better suited to other systems rather than given a full section. Another example is Raquel - Does it really need 4 sections to tell the story when it is very likely to get an article.Jason Rees (talk) 21:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: I feel that Tatiana's case is different, because we don't know if it is a official SPAC cyclone since I don't know if RSMC Nadi ever issued bulletins or advisories for Tatiana. In Dot's case, we know that it is a official cyclone for this basin, but we don't have any info, not even the winds.
If RSMC Nadi confirms Tatiana as a official SPAC cyclone, be sure I'll "fight" for a section and infobox for it on SPAC article. ABC paulista (talk) 01:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
@Hurricanehink: Unala will be removed from the typhoon season article if it follows your theory. -- Meow 02:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
No, I don't think it should be removed, that's not what I said. I only think they should be part of an "Other storms" section. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 03:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)