Talk:Cyclone Vance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Tropical cyclones / Storms  (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the storm articles task force (marked as Low-importance).
 
Note icon
This article has been assessed by editors of the WikiProject.
WikiProject Australia / Western Australia (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Cyclone Vance is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (marked as Mid-importance).
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for other than editorial assistance.

Todo[edit]

Generally, it's pretty good. One thing, though. A source is needed for the $100 million (1999 USD) total. --Hurricanehink (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Based on our current, more stringent grading criteria, I'm lowering it to start class. More ANYTHING would be good. – Chacor 15:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hoxygt[edit]

Nice article, not too sure why TC Vance has been rated at Cat4, there is no doubt it was a Cat5, wind estimates are signifacntly lower than actual. Commonwealth Bureau Of Meteorology also notes TC strength maintained for well over 24 hours after coastal crossing - will add refs. Hoxygt 03:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Your right, it's definitely a Cat 5 storm. I'll try to change it in the article. RaNdOm26 06:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale heading as noted in - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saffir-Simpson_Hurricane_Scale this rating scale only applies to systems in the Western Hemisphere. I will note in body of article that Vance met requirements of SSHS rating of 5 as it had wind gusts >280kph 'estimated' central pressure at peak of 910hPa with an estimated storm surge of "over 5m". (http://www.bom.gov.au/info/cyclone/vance/vance.pdf) Hoxygt 15:55, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do NOT remove it from the infobox. The infobox should have the SSHS equivalent as analysed by either the JTWC, or a conversion of 10-minute BOM winds. – Chacor 03:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok MY mistake as you can see I'm a mere beginner. It seems I was also incorrect to note that Vance made SSHS Cat5 status since its mean winds were too low. Out of interest why do all Tropical Cyclone systems on Wikipedia receive a SSHS equivalence rating? Is there history I could read on this? Or is it simply an attempt to provide an across the board rating system? Hoxygt 10:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I think the SSHS category is there so that the cyclone can be compared with hurricanes in the USA/Caribbean using the same category system. RaNdOm26 05:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, SSHS is just in here to provide a global equivalence.--Nilfanion (talk) 08:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cyclone Vance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)