Talk:Tropical Storm Erin (2007)

Tropical Storm Erin (2007) has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 12, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

Weather: Tropical / Atlantic Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Atlantic hurricane work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Still a TD

It should be noted that although the NHC has issued its last advisory, Erin is still a TD until the HPC changes its advisories to say "Remnants of TD Erin". – Chacor 14:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. The NHC always immediately ends advisories when a storm is on land at TD intensity, even if it is still tropical. Dennis in 2005 was a TD for several days over land before becoming a tropical low. CrazyC83 02:59, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you use for the dates the storm was active? ---CWY2190^T^C 20:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First NHC warning to last HPC warning that says "TD". – Chacor 01:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Norman, OK NWS statement (for my future reference) Hurricanehink (talk) 14:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2nd fatality

Here's the link: [1] Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seven fatalities reported: [2]

Yep, the current number is 8 deaths (4 direct and 4 indirect based on descriptions). CrazyC83 21:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Dean (2007)

There are two Deans? --Howard the Duck 16:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two Deans? – Chacor 16:48, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, these are two different storms? LOL, I got confused.... --Howard the Duck 16:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Erin is over Texas and Dean is in the Caribbean. ---CWY2190^T^C 17:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reborn over Oklahoma?

Lost in Dean's shadow, Erin (or its remnants) are making an amazing resurrection. Look at this image: a clearly-defined eye developed while over land in Oklahoma! This may become a rare over-land subtropical storm into the central US with rain reported as far north as Wisconsin... CrazyC83 15:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A circulation centre isn't necessarily an eye. Like TSes and hurricanes TDs also have circulation centres. Please don't speculate wildly and unnecessarily here, you should know better. – Chacor 15:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, it is still rather spectacular considering that this system was supposed to dissipate two days ago. Plasticup ^T/C 17:10, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone have any comments on this?

AN EXTRAORDINARY WEATHER EVENT CONTINUES OVER CENTRAL OKLAHOMA

THIS MORNING AS THE REMNANTS OF TROPICAL STORM ERIN HAVE

INTENSIFIED... RESULTING IN WHAT AMOUNTS TO AN INLAND TROPICAL

STORM. AT 8 AM... THE WELL-DEFINED CENTER WAS LOCATED OVER THE SOUTH

PART OF EDMOND BASED ON RADAR AND SURFACE OBSERVATIONS... MOVING

SLOWLY EAST AT 10 MPH. BANDS OF FLOOD-PRODUCING RAIN WERE ROTATING

AROUND THE CENTER ACROSS MUCH OF CENTRAL AND SOUTH CENTRAL OKLAHOMA.

GENERAL MOVEMENT OF THE HEAVY RAIN AREAS WAS EAST AT AROUND 10

MPH.

[3]

--Ebsameer 18:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, that link doesn't contain that text. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 18:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I webcited it this morning. Hurricanehink (talk) 19:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know but the HPC hinted in the advisory that it could be an inland tropical storm. 71.106.32.44 21:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is being debated a bit at the moment. It is agreed that it acquired sustained winds exceeding tropical storm force as a non-frontal, warm core low. It's up to NHC to call it a tropical storm. HPC is not allowed to upgrade. I said what I could politically in the Erin rainfall page while still being truthful. Thegreatdr 21:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I would wait to bring about this kind of change to a recent TC article, but why wait if the only reason it was operationally not brought up to 45 knots by HPC was a policy issue between NHC and HPC? SPC has a stake in the outcome this time, due to the type of warnings the WFOs were forced to issue, and the fact that it occurred in their backyard. No one doubts the data quality of the OK mesonet and the sustained winds of 50 mph reported at Watonga, as well as a few other sites that reported sustained winds of 40 mph...the data is not what is in dispute. Thegreatdr 13:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that no NHC or HPC advisory mentioned 45 kt winds it would not be right to list max winds at 45 - especially if the TCR comes out saying 35 in the end. – Chacor 13:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two references saying otherwise aren't enough in the meantime, eh? I think people understand that stats can change with any of these systems between the time of advisory issuance and the issuance of the TCR. Besides, it is highly likely this information will make the monthly global TC summary between now and then. Will that not be good enough either? Let's shift this debate into the main TC talk page. Thegreatdr 15:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the NHC lists 50 mph in its monthly summary table at the bottom of the TWSes, then fine, use 45 kt. But until then these readings were not in any official advisory. – Chacor 15:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy with any official statement, be it NHC or HPC. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 02:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flooding in Minnesota

I'm not sure if this belongs in this article or not, but heavy rainfall and flash flooding that occurred in Minnesota that killed at least six people on Saturday night/Sunday will likely break the state record for rainfall in a 24 hour period (unoffical total of 17" has come in). The NWS in the Twin Cities said that the rainfall was fueled by the remnants of Erin. [4] "What's fueling the deluge, forecasters say, are the remnants of Tropical Storm Erin, which blew into Texas last week and have been pushing northward with heavy rain and warm air. Although the storm itself was centered over the southern Plains on Sunday, it affected weather through the Mississippi River valley. Six people were killed in flooding in Oklahoma. "Those tropical systems, they're giant heat and moisture systems," said Matt Friedlein, meteorologist at the National Weather Service in Chanhassen." Gopher backer 13:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that doesn't have anything really to do with Erin at the moment as they were (and still are) discrete systems. The flooding up there was due to a stalled front over the region. However, they are supposed to converge and Erin could make that worse up there. CrazyC83 14:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not the same system. ---CWY2190^T^C 19:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a separate article, outside of WP:WPTC, if it is made. CrazyC83 17:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is considered PRE rainfall, whose moisture source was Erin. Here's a reference regarding PRE rainfall, and I do believe that the HPC advisories briefly mentioned this fact as well. Thegreatdr 21:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If we have a source that says outright that the midwest storms were intensified by PRE rainfall caused by Erin, then let's get it in the article. I already tried to note what I felt was a decent source, but was reverted[5] In retrospect, the quote provides only weak linkage which could be interpreted either way. Being as weak as it is, and coming from a journalist, not a direct quote, I'd say the reversion was fair. It still seems that we should spend the time to find more detail here. -Harmil 14:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Links which call Erin a tropical storm over Oklahoma

CBS news (looks like originating from AP.
News 10-ABC in California.
KOCO-5 from Oklahoma City.
AP.
None of these are official sources mind you, they merely state Erin was a tropical storm in Oklahoma. None of them gave specifics supporting it over than mentioning the eye-feature, or vague reference to the winds, however. The monthly summary from NHC should be interesting when it comes out between tomorrow and Monday. Thegreatdr 22:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- For certain, the monthly summary will be interesting. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - It looks similar to what's on the HPC website. They kept the maximum sustained winds at 40 mph though, for the time being. Looks like they're still trying to figure out what category the cyclone fits and what its intensity over Oklahoma was. Thegreatdr 12:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Hmm, the NHC is cautious in their wording, which means we should be as well. I don't believe we should call it a tropical storm over Oklahoma; just a cyclone that produced tropical storm force winds in isolated areas (per the NHC wording). Hurricanehink (talk) 14:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, we should be cautious about the terms we use. The operational intensity at that moment was 35 mph, even though it very well might have been higher. The TCR is going to be very interesting. CrazyC83 01:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of landphoon to wikipedia

While there were no reliable reference findable online for landcane, there were a few which discussed the unofficial term "landphoon". Rather than continue the revert war on this talk page, which has already proven costly, I'm posting this comment here to take its place. Since many blogs online called Erin either a landcane or landphoon, it appears appropriate to leave a comment on this talk page concerning the new article. Since it's not an "official" meteorological term with an official definition, I do agree that the landphoon/landcane term should be left out of the Erin article, unless some reliable source calls it such or the landphoon/landcane terms are eventually recognized as "official" meteorological terms. Thegreatdr 19:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SSDsite

A couple of days ago I realized that in the SSD site, there was 05L (Erin) instead of 95L. Weatherlover819 08:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The TCR

It's finally out. After a lot of debate, they decided to call it a "low" over Oklahoma for the lack of a better term. The official peak intensity is 35 kt. CrazyC83 (talk) 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Erin (2007)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I will be reviewing this article as soon as I can. Shrewpelt (talk) 17:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts:

In the lead, you talk a little about how this tropical storm's name was retired, but do not mention it in the article's body. You will need to talk a little about that if you want that sentance to be in the lead.
- Done. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"In Sisterdale, two people were killed when they were swept away stalled over Sister Creek[35]". You need a period in that sentence.
- Done. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed several redlinks; if articles are unlikely to be created for them, they probably should not be linked.
- Done. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I find it very interesting that this storm redeveloped over land. Is there any information on why this happened?
- The storm actually never redeveloped, but rather just formed in eye-like structure. In any event, there is no real known reason as to why that occurred. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Nine water rescues occurred along the I-44 corridor, which was most impacted by Erin's rainfall.[49]" Mostly, perhaps?
- Done. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have put this article on hold. Good luck! Shrewpelt (talk) 18:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just one more thing: add a citation for the last sentence in Impact, and then I will pass this article. Shrewpelt (talk) 19:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Passed. Good job on this article. I'd suggest bringing it to Peer Review if you want to make this a Featured Article. Good luck! Shrewpelt (talk) 19:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tropical Storm Erin (2007)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Use the TCR, and mention the Oklahoma brouhaha in the Storm history section. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 23:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 23:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 09:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tropical Storm Erin (2007). 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]