Talk:2021 Pacific typhoon season/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Invest 90W (Dujuan?)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There's an invest now and it has a medium chance of becoming a tropical cyclone. If it is named Auring by PAGASA, or intensifies to a depression, can someone put it? -AwesomeHurricaneBoss (Talk)

@AwesomeHurricaneBoss: Yeah I saw that, maybe first northern hemisphere tropical cyclone of 2021 and beginning of West Pacific typhoon season. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 16:27, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Beraniladri19: It seems pretty likely that it will become Dujuan. I keep checking, it is in the PAR but it is not named Auring yet. AwesomeHurricaneBoss

So far rsmc didn't say anything about that we should not use force thirteen and zoom earth. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 17:42, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dam222: Have u even seen the JTWC official website?? Neither F13 nor Zoom Earth have designated (or might be), but according to JTWC there's a medium chance of development it was designated as Invest 90W by JTWC. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

@Beraniladri19: JTWC said. JTWC is unofficial, use rsmc JMA or PAGASA Dam222 🌋 (talk) 05:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Dam222, If JTWC says that, there's also a high possibility that RSMC Tokyo and PAGASA will follow. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 05:12, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

@Beraniladri19: Low pressure area. See weather map https://www.jma.go.jp/en/g3/. When imd says the pressure of cyclone fani is 932, jtwc says that its pressure is 900 mb.How different Dam222 🌋 (talk) 05:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Dam222, Low pressure area is what JTWC says it as invest. It clearly marked, see 1008 mb mark near Philippines. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 05:40, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

@Beraniladri19 and Dam222: Not sure what you two are arguing about, but the standard here on WPac is to add systems when they reach tropical depression status, whether it be PAGASA, JMA, or JTWC, regardless of its current status to other agencies. As it stands, the system is a low-pressure area with a probability of formation, so we wait for further development. One thing is for certain: one way or another, as soon as the system reaches that standard, it will immediately get added. There is no need for a reminder here on the talk page because there are a lot of editors who are persistently checking JMA/JTWC/PAGASA around the clock. Chlod (say hi!) 08:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tags

@Hurricaneboy23:, instead of nearly starting an edit war, we should resolve the debate over tags in a more peaceful way.DachshundLover82 (talk) 16:08, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I already beat you to the WP:CON policy. Anyway, there is no purpose to adding a "Empty section" tag to a storm which just formed. This will be a reminder for the future (I'm assuming) and you're somewhat new to the project so no hard feelings, and it's quite good that you figured out to resolve a conflict via discussion instead of continously reverting. If there's so-called info, add it yourself! (WP:BOLD) but I am pretty sure that the JMA putting a tropical depression on a weathermap isn't enough info yet. At least give the section a chance before flaring it with a "Empty section" template, which pretty much implies that no one is working on it (but there's nothing to add?). Also, I'm not sure what you meant by the JTWC is "glitching". It's not 01W yet from any sources I can find Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 16:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hurricaneboy23:, first of all I wouldn’t consider myself new since it’s been a while since I joined. Second of all, the JTWC has been loosing connection to the servers today. Next, if it’s on the weathermap, that’s enough info. Just add something like "the JMA reported a tropical depression formed in February 16". Also I’ve added the info you had requested, please try to be more kind and not ask for stuff with exclamation marks. Thanks for our agreement.DachshundLover82 (talk) 16:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure how adding exclamation marks (I'm not yelling at you) and preventing an edit war is "unkind", and considering you haven't been on Wikipedia for more than a year, you are still relatively new. Anyway, thanks for contributing to the rest of the section. Make sure to make more bold edits. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 16:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I have noticed this problem around the wiki as well and while something like "the JMA reported that a tropical depression formed on February 16" would be simple to add. I don't see the need for an editor to immediately tag the section, when that editor is perfectly capable of finding the info and adding it themselves.Jason Rees (talk) 17:42, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Hurricaneboy23:, how could I make bold edits when the JTWC website was continuously going down. The person who added the depression update first should have added content, this could have all been avoided that easily. I have noticed a problem around this wiki of people adding tropical depressions, and leaving the rest blank. I wish we could do better than this. Also, I have been on Wikipedia for over a year. I first starting editing as an IP user on September 11, 2019. Plus, I wouldn’t be calling people "new" out of the blue like that, I find it a bit awkward.DachshundLover82 (talk) 01:57, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Glitch

There's a glitch, if I add the second tropical depression on the timeline of the article. Whenever I add this, the name of the system automatically disappears. Pls fix this. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 16:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

This isn't something we can easily fix as it seems to be a gltich with the software itself then anything we do. Just bear with us as I am asking around to see if it can be fixed.Jason Rees (talk) 18:59, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Bug fixed. Timeline updated. Chlod (say hi!) 01:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Ah, there is however a catch — the broken version was cached on Wikimedia's servers and therefore we can't use that one anymore. Which means when the storm is named, the name has to be "Auring " (with the deliberate space), until the day switches over to the 18th such that we can change the date and use the trimmed name. Chlod (say hi!) 01:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Reminder to editors updating current storm information

This is the Western Pacific basin. The official Regional Specialized Meteorological Centre for this basin is the Japan Meteorological Agency, who provides data on typhoon position, 10-minute maximum sustained wind speeds, gusts, and minimum barometric pressure. Since they provide all of the aforementioned data, we are required by WPTC style guide to use their data. We are only supposed to use the data of other agencies for data which is not provided by the RSMC (e.g. Joint Typhoon Warning Center for 1-minute maximum sustained winds speeds, and the PAGASA, Hong Kong Observatory for storm warnings in their respective countries). Chlod (say hi!) 01:29, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Keeping storm summaries succinct

I think I will be siding with Fleur for this, but yea I do believe that the section for Dujuan is rather long. Honestly with that much information, an article could be created, no idea why it got deleted? But it is best to keep storm summaries short, especially since this is a PTS article, which tends to be long. Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I was planning to chop it down after I got some time off academics but it looks like you already did that. Won't be interfering further then. Cheers and thanks for the help! Chlod (say hi!) 08:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Chlod: No worries! Honestly I am really proud of your edits so far, it is very impressive. Article-worthy really. I assumed there was a discussion on why some people placed it back on draft, but I missed them. Typhoon2013 (talk) 19:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Section for JMATD1

Hey everybody, so I have looked at a few other season articles, and every unnumbered TD that caused heavy damage gets it’s own section in the season article and an article itself. Should we do the same for the January tropical depression since it caused millions of dollars worth of losses and a fatality?DachshundLover82 (talk) 01:58, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey could you please clarify or give examples of this? I believe you may have confused PAGASA depressions like this as unnumbered TDs. As for the section, I don't think it deserves one, since this depression caused 24 deaths and doesn't have a section. Akbermamps! 04:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

This depression only worsened the ongoing weather events in the Philippines. The depression itself did not cause millions of dollars in damage and three fatalities. The combined effects of the storm, a frontal system, and the winds of the intertropical convergence zone did. That being said, this storm does not pass the minimum amount of notability for an article. I personally wouldn't even give it its own section. For all we know, the JMA declared a tropical depression, and soon lowered its warnings. "JMA TD 1" is itself incorrect since the JMA does not number tropical depressions. No JTWC number, no PAGASA name. Thus, you can't attribute the deaths and damages to that depression, and the attached source does not attribute the deaths and damages to just the storm either. For this reason, last year's TD that hit Vietnam was stored in the "Other systems" section, with the actual effects being the 2020 Central Vietnam floods article. The effects how ever can be kept for comprehensiveness, as there is no "2021 Philippine floods" article.

Lastly, to address "an article itself", not every storm deserves an article. There's a lot of cases where a storm would do minimal impacts and damages which don't warrant the creation of an article. Avoid creating an article unless the storm has gained some form of notability (which is basic Wikipedia policy), or else you'll essentially be crystal-balling the impact of a storm. Chlod (say hi!) 06:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@DachshundLover82: hi. Basically same as Chlod's reasoning here. So this TD (weirdly) was not named by PAGASA hence it did not really have its own section. There are other cases like the 2009 and 2016 Vietnam TDs where they get their own section, because it is linked to their own article. This TD, I believe, is not really fit for its own article as there is only very few and limited information to create one. I hope that makes sense. Typhoon2013 (talk) 09:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Two drafts

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

So there's a discussion of merging DachshundLover82's draft and Chlod's draft. What do you guys think?Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 08:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

My version. Nothing personal, but rather the quality of content is what matters for me. If the other draft weren't in a questionable state (before the copy-paste edits), then I would have been in support of using that draft. Chlod (say hi!) 08:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Chlod, Let's wait what others say. Also others should use Support or Oppose statement before commenting Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 08:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beraniladri19: Your question calls for a choice: My draft or DL82's draft. What point would we exactly be supporting or opposing? Chlod (say hi!) 08:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Chlod, I meant to say that which draft is better and should be merge it or not. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 08:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beraniladri19: That's still ambiguous. Support or oppose moving to my draft or support or oppose moving to DL82's? This is not the right discussion to be using Support and Oppose statements if your plan was to see which draft would be better to merge towards. Chlod (say hi!) 09:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah maybe we should merge the drafts together since I’m working on adding stuff on Micronesia and Palau. Also, I didn’t copy and paste since it wasn’t word for word as in the season article.DachshundLover82 (talk) 12:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@DachshundLover82: You should probably check the diff right after the permanent link I gave and see exactly who copied the content. Chlod (say hi!) 14:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

However, of we have to choose I’d choose mine since it has the most updated title.DachshundLover82 (talk) 12:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

With all due respect, "the most updated title" is not the most valid reason for merging a draft - namely because of the loss of attribution that occurs due to page history changes. Chlod (say hi!) 14:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Chlod:, also my draft has info for preparations and impact.DachshundLover82 (talk) 15:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Support Merging Chlod's draft into DL82's. This is a tough one, but DL82's draft is longer, more detailed, and better sourced. I think the priority should be given to DL82's draft.--🌀Kieran207(talk-Contribs)🌀 23:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Supporting Draft:Tropical Storm Surigae, the other draft can be merged and redirected. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Support:- Support merging all three drafts; I have this one. I believe everything merged will result in a better article, and it will improve the chances of it becoming a GA or a FA. ~~ 🌀𝚂𝙲𝚂 𝙲𝙾𝚁𝙾𝙽𝙰🌀 13:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Chlod, DachshundLover82, Kieran207, Jo-Jo Eumerus, and Super Cyclonic Storm Corona: So, what is the final decision ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 16:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

• Reply to Beraniladri19, mine as already stated above since at this point, Chlod's is outdated and lacking vital info.DachshundLover82 (talk) 16:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• @Beraniladri19: I think we need more WPTC members involved in this. @Hurricane Noah, ABC paulista, JoeMT615, Supportstorm, Jasper Deng, ChessEric, Gummycow, AC5230, LightandDark2000, Destroyeraa, Aegeou2, Skarmory, KN2731, Hurricanehink, Cyclonebiskit, Hurricaneboy23, CycloneFootball71, AveryTheComrade, CodingCyclone, Chicdat, Jason Rees, and LowercaseGuy: I would like you all to voice your opinions about this. ~~ 🌀𝚂𝙲𝚂 𝙲𝙾𝚁𝙾𝙽𝙰🌀 17:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• Support merge Uhhhhh...do we really need a discussion for this? Just merge the articles and keep it moving. There is no need to have a debate over this.ChessEric (talk · contribs) 17:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
• Support merging all 3 - As ChessEric said, I don't think we need a discussion on this. Take the useful information from each draft, merge the histories, and then keep working on it. Remember, we are building an encyclopedia together. It doesn't really matter who wrote it as long as we are providing good, factual data. :) CodingCyclone! 🌀 📘 18:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Support: Merge the 3 drafts per @CodingCyclone:, @Super Cyclonic Storm Corona:, and @ChessEric:. Honestly, with this information, this would be a very informational article. From: 🌀Aegeou2🌀 | To-Do 18:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I just made the article using info from all the drafts. Honestly no reason to debate the creation of the article. JoeMT615 (talk) 19:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Typhoon Surigae

Please don't use this talk page as a forum. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 12:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
On satellite imagery I am beginning to see an eye form does anyone else see this. Bobby Doo1234 (talk) 14:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Well the eye was already there, so I mean.....--🌀Kieran207-talk🌀 01:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Brutal overuse of UTC times

The section and article for Choi-wan has an egregious overuse of exact times, especially near the landfalls. If someone could summarize this section so that it conforms with the project style guide's advice on exact time ("In general, it is good not to overuse exact times, as it disrupts the flow of prose."), that'd be great. Also an additional note to the users who frequent the storm sections: do not overuse exact times. Thanks! Chlod (say hi!) 01:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Chlod: I just came back from a trip and just noticed this. I do agree, and this is pretty much the similar issue with my earlier thread about "Keeping storm summaries succinct" back in February. Typhoon2013 (talk) 12:04, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @HurricaneParrot:, @Beraniladri19: and @HurricaneEdgar: - who has also done an excellent job with updating the storm information and updating them, which I am impressed! But please see this section and my earlier one from Feb. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 12:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Typhoon2013, ok, I didn't noticed that in Choi-wan section. Let me see... Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 12:36, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I'll check it.. (Although I'm a bad copyeditor) :< 🌀HurricaneParrot🐦 06:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Cempaka

There has not been a standalone page for Cempaka, yet we have a standalone page for systems like 08W which frankly didn't really produce significant impacts. Is there any draft being created so far, at least? CycloneEditor (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

CycloneEditor, Yes, click here Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 09:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft for Typhoon Cempaka

If you want to help create the page for Cempaka, here it is :) : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tropical_Storm_Cempaka#Vietnam CycloneEditor (talk) 04:17, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

SS Nepartak

@Beraniladri19: @HurricaneEdgar: @Akbermamps: I've been looking at the JTWC prognostic reasonings so far during Nepartak's lifetime. This is really odd and unclear from them where the JTWC classifies the system as a tropical storm in their warnings, but mentions how it's a subtropical storm (see current reasoning). I think this should have a mention not just in the storm summary but also in the infobox. Meow has also agreed that the JTWC has classified Nepartak as subtropical (see storm path). Typhoon2013 (talk) 09:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Typhoon2013: I think they are just simplifying things in the warnings, since it could be tedious to have a lot of categories to define a storm as; they're probably just going with the TD/TS/TY classification to make it simpler while mentioning Nepartak's status as a subtropical storm in the reasonings. The best track also showed Nepartak as a SS for most of its lifetime, so I don't think this is worth mentioning. Akbermamps 10:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Akbermamps: Yeah I mean for now we'll stick it as Tropical Storm intensity since that is what the main warnings are being called with. However let's wait until the JTWC BT next year until we can say if this really was a Subtropical Storm (as for instance with 2018's 07W). Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Typhoon2013, Umm....according to their prognostic reasoning, I saw they classified as tropical storm then they say it's a subtropical cyclone, which's confusing, that's why I didn't mentioned it. For eg:- They classified as Tropical Storm 11W (Nepartak), then they say in their summary section, assessed as subtropical storm. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 10:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

might i'm agree here, the JTWC re-analysis this system become subtropical storm. HurricaneEdgar 01:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2021

I would like to update the death count from Typhoon IN-FA (Fabian) to 63, as i found an article from the South China Morning Post claiming 63 deaths : https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3142430/typhoon-fa-flights-and-rail-services-suspended-eastern-china and that these deaths occured in central Henan. It also includes information that i wish could be added to the main website for IN-FA, such as 10-14 inches of rainfall expected, the fact that it affected 11.4 million people, and the cancelling of flights, and the chinese alert system. Thank you. 21BalaC5 (talk) 04:48, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@21BalaC5: I think this edit request would be better served for Typhoon In-fa, no? Regardless, by my count after making this edit request you should actually be autoconfirmed now, so you're free to be bold and edit away on these two articles yourself. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 14:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Watches and warnings

Uh, Macau has Signal No. 3 but unfortunately there's no field to put that. Can someone create one for that? CycloneEditor (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Link: https://www.smg.gov.mo/en/subpage/28/typhoon-main CycloneEditor (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Lupit

Oh Lord, there's no meteorological history for Lupit... CycloneEditor (talk) 05:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

CycloneEditor, U can add it though... Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 05:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Yea, I'll try my best CycloneEditor (talk) 05:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I'll be in the other depressions. 🌀HurricaneParrot🐦 06:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey, guys i create Lupit draft If you wanna help improve this draft click here Draft:Tropical Storm Lupit (2021) Thank you :). HurricaneEdgar 12:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@HurricaneEdgar, CycloneEditor, and HurricaneParrot: Ok guys, we have to act as a team. HurricaneParrot will take care of Lupit, HurricaneEdgar will update all this, I will take care of Godio#PH (forgot the intl name lol) and CycloneEditor will take care of Nida (this thing really needs a cleanup). Cool with everyone ? Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 11:58, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft for TS Lupit

Is there any draft for a standalone page on Lupit? CycloneEditor (talk) 10:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't think so. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:34, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

there is a a draft for Lupit here User:HurricaneParrot/sandbox/Tropical Storm Lupit (2021) HurricaneEdgar 11:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Remove Maintenance template?

The section on Tropical Storm Nida needed copyediting. I fixed it up a bit. Does anyone believe I should remove the template now?Gummycow ^moo_milk 21:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

16W

So let's say 16W bounced back once again and possibly gets named as conditions become gradually more favorable, would it still be on 16W's section or a new JMA TD section will just be made again? CycloneEditor (talk) 07:23, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Since the system was named by the JMA it is unlikely that they carry Omais/16W as one system in their best track. We follow JMA data for our page statistics so we need to treat 16W as several different systems unfortunately. Same goes for 12W. The JTWC is not authoritative in this basin as a reminder. Supportstorm (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

There is another problem.. JMA had 16W with the tropical cyclone identification TC2117. Omais has a new tropical cyclone identification of TC2118 as 16W "reformed" into a new tropical depression. Grifforzer (talk) 06:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Chanthu and Conson (draft)

• Draft:Tropical Storm Conson (2021)
• Draft:Typhoon Chanthu (2021)

Hello, everyone there is a draft 2 storm Conson and Chantchu you are welcome to improve this draft. HurricaneEdgar 05:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Chanthu

JMA dunce moment, not even an STS by their analysis even tho MW shows a stacked eyewall and satellite shows that there's curling VHTs but oh well. Official's official CycloneEditor (talk) 10:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Present

there is disargeement Present or present, me and Hiddenstranger for me Present should capitalized i start this discussion to prevent a edit war HurricaneEdgar 06:15, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

@HurricaneEdgar: MOS:TOPRESENT doesn't capitalize present, so I guess no one really noticed this for years. Akbermamps 07:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)