Jump to content

Talk:Cyclone Winston

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Strongest storm in SHem according to 1-min winds?

[edit]

Is it true that Winston is the strongest cyclone in the Southern Hemisphere for 1-minute sustained winds? Cyclonebiskit stated in his edit summary that JTWC re-analysed Winston's track and decreased it to 155kts. So does Winston still hold the record, tied with another storm or not? Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

With the recent reassessment to 155 kt, Winston now ties Cyclone Zoe (2002) and Cyclone Monica (2006) as having the highest one-minute sustained winds in the Southern Hemisphere. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 07:22, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyclonebiskit: Thanks. I wanted to know what source you use for this because I always use something like this or the JTWC JMV3.0 Data. Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Typhoon2013: this version updates for changes they make after the fact. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 07:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:05, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Death toll

[edit]

Wikipedia's Main Page has not been updated to mention that deaths have occurred. Only admins can edit the Main Page, otherwise I would do it. Admins, please update. Akld guy (talk) 10:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Akld guy: I'll update the blurb shortly. For future reference, if you're looking to have the ITN blurb adjusted the place to ask is WP:ERRORS . ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Date format

[edit]

Seriously, could you stop using your "February 20" format and stick to what the rest of the world uses? - edit: Sorry, haven't logged in for a very long time and now figured out how to sign :) Xushi (talk) 07:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also do not understand why we should use MDY instead of DMY for a Fijian article. -- Meow 08:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in agreement with the two editors above. Akld guy (talk) 08:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Done all dates changed to DMY format. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyclonebiskit: @Meow: I really wanted to start a talk page about this in the Wikiproject talk page, deciding whether we should use the MDY or DMY format or use in different basins. Thanks for that anon user for pointing that out. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:51, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Typhoon2013: DMY is always used for the Australian basin, and MDY is used in all others unless there are specific cases such as this one. Probably could be adjusted, but there generally haven't been major issues with this. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 04:53, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyclonebiskit: Only North Pacific and North Atlantic articles should use MDY. Most of countries around the Indian Ocean and the South Pacific Ocean use DMY. -- Meow 05:15, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyclonebiskit: I find this Example image helpful -- Xushi (talk) 07:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is Winston still (sub)tropical? or extratropical?

[edit]

@Damien4794: stated that Winston is still active but subtropical. Is this true? However the BoM had mentioned that Winston is now in the AusR basin but it is classified as an Ex-Tropical cyclone. So is Winston active as a (sub)tropical cyclone or now an extratropical cyclone? Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:29, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MetService are calling it an extratropical cyclone/low within their bulletins, while the JTWC are calling it Subtropical.Jason Rees (talk) 22:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is Cyclone Winston the costliest in the basin?

[edit]

I know that some sources are saying that Winston is the costliest in the basin, but from what I can find Cyclone Val of 1991 did at least $278 million USD in damage which accounting for inflation would be about $484 million USD today. Undescribed (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are currently saying that Winston is "Costliest cyclone in South Pacific history" - except that Yasi since it was in the South Pacific until it made landfall on Australia. However, if as your edit summary suggests that you want to go down the basin argument then we will need to define the basin. Again if its not East of 160E then the costliest is probably Yasi or something else - if it is then Id like to investigate Namu, Ofa, Val and a few others which may have caused more damage than Winston.Jason Rees (talk) 22:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was originally thinking that it was the costliest storm east of 160E. It would definitely be good to look further into the storms that you mentioned as they indeed may have caused more damage. The exact damage totals for those storms don't seem to be as well documented either, so for now it seems to be best to consider Winston the costliest in the basin (but not the south pacific as a whole), until it can be proven otherwise.--Undescribed (talk) 22:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Should also keep in mind that we're working with a preliminary estimate, not concrete totals. From what I've been able to gather verified damage from Winston is presently at US$80.06 million, for what it's worth. Making such a broad claim on an extremely preliminary estimate might be going too far (even if the claim may indeed verify). ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That may indeed be the case. It does seem as thought the estimated damage cost has being fairly consistent, as this site: http://www.ibtimes.com/cyclone-winston-fijis-estimated-cost-damages-exceeds-470m-10-island-nations-total-gdp-2332151 says the estimated losses have been raised to $470 million USD. Would it be best to just leave the observed losses so far in the article, or to mention the estimate as well? Undescribed (talk) 11:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 54 external links on Cyclone Winston. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 03:50, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest winds worldwide

[edit]

I feel that such record, as the most intense tropical cyclone on record globally in terms of 10-minute maximum sustained winds, should be cited here for its notability. No other agency assessed such high winds, so it is the stongest overall. ABC paulista (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really. There are a number of storms that have much higher sustained winds reaching into the 200 mph zone, such as Hurricane Patricia. Also, in order to include a statement like that, we would need an official source. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Meteorological history and impacts in Fiji articles

[edit]

Given the record-breaking SHem pressure of 884 mb, and the fact Winston was the strongest to make landfall in the Fiji Province, and that it was the costliest in the SPac on record, I think it wouldn't hurt to have a Meteorological history of Cyclone Winston and Effects of Cyclone Winston in Fiji pages on here. Plus, the MH in the main article is a bit lengthy and I think it should be cut down at some point. --MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 20:18, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Hurricanehink:, @Cyclonebiskit:, and @TropicalAnalystwx13: for opinions since they seem to have IMO, good opinions for ideas like this. --MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 14:41, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Both sub-articles are definitely reasonable to have given the severity of impact and how long-lived and intense the storm was. I have no problem with them being created in the future. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 14:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At first glance I have no serious problems but I'll let @Jason Rees: comment since he's the primary editor of this basin. YE Pacific Hurricane 14:53, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose having the Fiji subarticle. There weren't enough impacts outside of that nation, so having two subarticles would make the main article rather bare-bones. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) My thoughts are that any MH article would need to be careful about calling Winston, anything other than a remnant low after it weakened below tropical cyclone intensity on February 25, due to a lack of clarity over what type of system it was. Unfortunately this also extends to what its dissipation date should be, as Wellington's last BT point is at their border with BoM. The JTWC extends their BT out to February 28, while Steve Young's tracks show that the system was trackable until March 3. However, with all of that being said I think Winston could do with an MH article despite not being the longest tracked TC in the SPAC.Jason Rees (talk) 16:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fatalities

[edit]

Hi, the intro states "Striking Fiji at Category 5 intensity on 20 February, Winston inflicted extensive damage on many islands and killed 764 people" (see 3rd paragraph) the info-box states the number of fatalities as 44. Which is correct please? Thanks, Wolfgang K (talk) 21:55, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wolfgang K:, Winston only caused 44 fatalities not 764. There was a random bit of vandalism by an IP the other day which I have just reverted after seeing your message.Jason Rees (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Track of Cyclone Winston

[edit]

Hello. I reverted the path of Cyclone Winston back to the previous path because the current track is outdated. SpicySweets (talk) 19:26, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not. It was generated using JTWC best track data. Please refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/Color RfC and refrain from further insertion of old-colored maps.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cyclone_Winston&oldid=1210961507"