User talk:Storm05

Archives: 2005 Tropical Discussions of Storm05. January-February 2006 Tropical Dicussions of Storm05 April 2006 Tropical Dicussions of Storm05 May 2006 Tropical Discussions of Storm05 June-October 2006 Tropical Discussions of Storm05 November-December 2006 Tropical Discussions of Storm05 January-March 2007 Tropical Discussions of Storm05

Hurricane Gaston Predictions listed on RFD

I've listed Hurricane Gaston Predictions on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion as an implausible redirect to Hurricane Gaston (2004). The discussion can be found here. --Core desat 02:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bret0899damge5.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bret0899damge5.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 15:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace Articles

In the past, you created several userspace articles, and some of them have since become articles. However, they still show up under the category Incomplete hurricane infoboxes. Would you be willing to redirect them, either to the created article or elsewhere such as your user page, or put them up on MFD to solve the problem? The pages include various of your sandboxes. Just as a reminder you have a lot of subpages that are not articles, many of which have not been worked on for quite some time. Those can be found here. Hurricanehink (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Blob off Florida

That's a pretty cool looking feature on visible, though if you look on the infrared imagery you can see there is no convection associated with it. If some were to pop up, it would have a slightly better chance, though it is still April, the NHC is very conservative in upgrading off-season storms, and the water temperatures/wind shear are too unfavorable. Hurricanehink (talk) 19:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my comments

I apologise for this - highly inappropriate of myself to make such a nasty comment on an article talkpage. Perhaps I was rash in that sweeping statement. What I meant was that if Dora's article would in the end turn out to be as good as a season page summary, there would be no point in creating such an article. I certainly did not mean to discourage you from editing; nor did I intend to govern your edits. Of course, you are most welcome to add new content and expand anything. I wish you all the best for your future efforts. Thanks. - SpLo T // 07:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Stockcarcrash 48.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Stockcarcrash 48.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Note that a free and better (new) replacement image was used instead. Royalbroil 02:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hermine 1998

I left relevant information in the talk page. It is not really my place to determine it for myself for wikipedia...that's up to you all. However, I did leave comments about bias, which would be good to read by all. Thegreatdr 17:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bbc1.jpg

Hello, Storm05. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Bbc1.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Storm05/Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 05:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Stockcarcrash_32.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stockcarcrash_32.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Iamunknown 23:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stockcarcrash_41a.jpg

I have tagged Image:Stockcarcrash_41a.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Iamunknown 23:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WPTC members

Unless users have specifically said they are leaving the project, please don't remove them. I know for a fact that at least one user you listed as having left is actually still around and lurks on IRC now and then. Lack of Wikipedia contributions does not mean not contributing or being part of the project on a whole. Unless they themselves remove their name I do not find it appropriate that you remove them. They could easily be on a wikibreak (for example, Nilfanion's on an indefinite wikibreak. But he's said he'll return. Does that mean you'll move him to "members who have left"?) - it is not right. – Chacor 14:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further: I appreciate that this has been discussed before. But that was a while ago. I do not find it right that you are doing this. If you insist, I'd recommend you start a new discussion at the talk page to gauge current consensus for removing them. – Chacor 14:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"sorry chacor but theres no evidence to support your claim." You can easily ask any other member who frequents the IRC channel. Having said that, I appreciate your decision to self-revert. Thank you. – Chacor 14:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside: I've looked through Typhoon Kent. I saw that you tried to copyedit the article yourself, but you still missed a few misspellings (the second "designation" is still spelt wrongly, for example). I've tagged the article for cleanup and will copyedit it myself tomorrow if you want me to. One other tip: I see you're working on Dianmu. It's officially "Typhoon Dianmu", so please only refer to it as a "super typhoon" when talking about the JTWC. Thanks. – Chacor 14:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1275 xl.jpg

Has no rationale, not tagged as I am unsure what Public TV counts as (C) wise in the US, you might wish to add a fair use rationale so it's clear. ShakespeareFan00 10:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Dianmu damage

Just a heads up, the crop damage from Typhoon Dianmu was $68.3 million (2004 USD); this site lists it as 6.85 billion (2004 JPY), and this site provides a conversion to USD. It's not the entire damage total, but it's something. Hurricanehink (talk) 21:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strawberry Shortcake

Hi Storm05, I've had a look at the article. The article was created in 2003. Incline citations are not a requirement, at that time there were no such things and people added references to the end of articles, like in real paper encyclopedias. Also, at that time there were no real concrete 'reliable sources' and other citation policies that we now have. Granted, the article should have to meet our current policies. Have you tried asking him to discuss on the talk page? Alternatively you might want to ask for an article request for comment. – Chacor 12:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dianmu

I would strongly recommend holding off on publishing your sandbox article on Dianmu until you've had someone give it a thorough copyedit. It's currently riddled with typos and grammatical errors, some serious (dissapated instead of dissipated, for instance). There are also problems with the content itself; your damage figure is in 2004 USD, and you have a JPY figure listed with a dollar sign, among many other problems. --Core desat 06:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see any errors other than that typo that i just removed. Also its a stanadard that theres should be XXX 2004 USD, XXX 2006 USD for any storm article. Also the errors that you just mentioned are only minor ones (mostly typographical) and also you must have been confused because WPAC articles have different standards than Atlantic and EPAC articles. (see discussion above) Storm05 11:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again storm05 I do wish you'd stop just churning out articles that need to be fixed badly and instead focussed on just one article at a go (i.e. after moving to mainspace, checking it for errors etc and doing cleanups, and not just ignoring it and moving on to the next article). I've left some comments at the talk page. There definitely is enough information and notability, so the article is warranted. But there are still some errors. For instance, you mis-spelt the storm name itself at least three times. – Chacor 13:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Storm05/Hurricane Dora (1999)

I hope you don't mind, but I copyedited your sandbox article for you. If I were an admin, I would move it for you, so I'll let you do the honors of requesting a move, if you want to. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Storm05, regarding this. I've reverted it, since the edit was unnecessary. It's the same thing being cited, so there's no need to have more than one ref number for it. Using ref name is easier as it combines all of them into the same ref, so that people who look at the refs can see where each individual citation is being cited, rather than having to go through four different refs for the same citation. Hope you understand. Thanks. – Chacor 12:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones in popular culture deletion debate

Greetings! An article which you have edited, Tropical cyclones in popular culture, has been nominated for deletion. You may wish to voice your opinion in the deletion debate. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:0410258258 jim hunter.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:0410258258 jim hunter.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 00:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:BL059FA.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BL059FA.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:9265193.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:9265193.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 20:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Template:2007 Atlantic hurricane season buttons

There was a consensus because the rationale for one argument was much stronger. All seasonal articles are arranged according to the dates of formation, and the NHC decided Ingrid formed first, hence it's designation 8L and Humberto's designation 9L. Now that there are two unnamed storms in the list alphabetizing it makes even less sense, because their places in the list are obviously determined by either their numerical designations or their dates of formation. Of course, this was explained in the talk page discussion, so stop changing it. Good kitty 18:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was no consensus, and the the 8L and 9L were designated by the US NAVY not the NHC and the NHC does not(and no longer) arranges named storms by Tropical Depression number. Storm05 18:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In either case, the revert-warring going on in that template is not a pleasant sight. I've protected the page until this dispute is resolved. Let's discuss this on Talk:2007 Atlantic hurricane season. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 19:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:4466618 BG1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:4466618 BG1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pilotguy 14:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of West Africa hurricanes

Hi, I noticed that you nominated the above article at WP:GAN. WP:GAN, however, does not review lists. The correct place for lists that want to be promoted is WP:FL. Cheers, CP 15:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Percy040-big.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Percy040-big.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jackaranga 10:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WPTC Active Members

User:Hurricanehink/Active

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bbc1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bbc1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Gb-015.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gb-015.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle 80

Hey, I just wanted to say good job on that article. I'm not really sure what's going on lately, given that there's been some 14 articles created in the new year alone, but I'm loving all of the new articles. There was one thing I wanted to bring to your attention. It seems that User:Jake52 was planning on making an article on Tropical Storm Felice in 1970, though I'm not sure if he's started. I see you're working on a sandbox of that storm. I'm not sure if he's done any research, but maybe you two could collaborate. Keep up the good work. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

For public domain images by the US government, do you think you'd be able to upload them to Wikimedia Commons, in the future? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Upnair.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Upnair.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1976-WCREST-REPORT.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:1976-WCREST-REPORT.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:10, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BL059FA.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BL059FA.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:2-diana.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:2-diana.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:2-erin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:2-erin.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please join this discussion

Talk:Iran-Iraq War#Infobox again: the purpose is to add clarity, not fight battles. If it's this difficult to manage, it needs to be deleted.

Thanks, Erxnmedia (talk) 21:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BL059FA.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:BL059FA.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Combatants

I see you are constantly inserting some combatants in conflict pages. You should discontinue doing that unless you provide good citations or discuss it first. Thank you. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 13:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know what the word combatant means? UNIFIL in Lebanon wasn't engaged in combat they never fired one shot at the militants.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you dont look at the infobox :) It says Belligerents. Open Belligerent and READ the first line. Then look if the UN in Albania fits in that description. Cheers, --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

also, you just broke 3RR --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1][2]: mean having an aggressive or fighting attitude, belligerent often implies being actually at war or engaged in hostilities. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how was UNIFIL a participant? Only by staying 300 km (they are in South Lebanon) from Nahr al-Bared?? Do you wonder why no one put them in already?? Sorry the belligerents section should contain only troops that engaged in fighting (shooting/killing/bombarding etc) See example 2006 Lebanon War: there's not even Lebanon as a combatant and that was discussed thoroughly --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that fulling warboxes with anything you can thing of is a sort of obsession, and it doesn't regard only War in Darfur... Please cease doing this. There is no consensus against such a move, and it goes against the general praxis that yas always been applied, and the sense of the word combatant.--Aldux (talk) 18:26, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the purpose of the infobox which is to list who sent in troops regardeless of what you stated above. Storm05 (talk) 19:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can try to put it in all the ways, but it is simply out of the world that Chad, CAR, AU and UN can be put among "combatants 1", where the rebels and the ones already mentioned are cited lumped all together. If you wan't to mention the UN (or better, UNAMID) and the AU then place them in a specific section, dividing the infobox in 3, but Chad and CAR are not in Darfur.--Aldux (talk) 20:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Storm05/List of Tropical Depressions

Hey, I notice you're working on a list of tropical depressions. I'm not sure how good of an idea that is. There aren't good records for them worldwide, even in the Atlantic, and there are far too many of them to be worth having a list of them. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Babe.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Babe.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 18:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Impact3.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Impact3.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Jokwe Track map

Though it is a poor map, it is the only map we have on the storm. The users who have the track maps have not been doing the track maps lately. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:102668ta-1.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:102668ta-1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:1976-WCREST-REPORT.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:1976-WCREST-REPORT.JPG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iran-Iraq infobox

I don't know how long you have been following Iran-Iraq War, but there has been, it seems, more arguing over the contents of the infobox than over the contents of the main article. The Military History Project, which created the infobox for wars, is again discussing them, but the consensus there is that complex issues cannot be reduced to something that fits in an infobox. There are cases where special handling has worked, such as Second World War, where there are no flags in the infobox but, instead, wikilinks to articles explaining the complex nature of the sides (e.g., Italy pre- and post-1943 goes into different sides).

The infobox controversy seemed to have died down, and useful work was being done on content. My personal preference is that it be left alone, and countries other than Iran and Iraq can be detailed in the main article and subarticles. If you believe there is a pressing need for the U.S. flag, I urge you to discuss it on the article talk page, before a revert war starts.

Sincerely, Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 15:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FT

Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/2003 Pacific hurricane season FYI. Pie is good ^{(Apple is the best)} 00:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frances (1998)

I think I finally got it up to B class. Since you were the person who created the page, I figured you'd be interested. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of UFO-related entities

I have nominated List of UFO-related entities, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of UFO-related entities. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. ScienceApologist (talk) 05:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Storm05, I ma Yellow Evan, this might make you happy because most of your EPAC (eg.Hurricane Lane (2000) and Hurricane Dora (1999)) articles were bordline non-notable now the conses to do articles for every storm that basin in fact I unmerged Lane over a month ago. Fshspinnes like Tropical Storm Erick (2007) have articles now. Cheers. Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home ,Sandbox Happy Veterans day 17:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:2005 05 coneyisl.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:2005 05 coneyisl.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for involvement

According to the history of the Iran-Iraq War article, you are a significant contributor to it. Therefore, I was wondering if you would like to get involved in a discussion I have started concerning a proposal to trim some sections, and move some text back into the article. The discussion can be found here: [3]. Thank you very much if you do get involved. Cheers for reading. Terrakyte (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Xeniaf5l.jpg

File copyright problem with File:Xeniaf5l.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Xeniaf5l.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. 71.66.241.245 (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:20050905-9 f1g5950-515h.jpg

Just to let you know that I recently copied the above image that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons, the Wikimedia central media repository for all free media. The image was either individually tagged or was in a category tagged with the {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} template. Your image is now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following location: Commons:File:Bush Katrina Bethany World Prayer Center.jpg. During the move I changed the name of the image to better reflect Naming Conventions policy, duplicate file name and/or Commons naming restrictions. Any links to the image has been updated to reflect the new name as it exists now on Commons. The original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with WP:CSD#F8. Cheers! --Captain-tucker (talk) 17:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:20050905-9 f1g5950-515h.jpg

File:20050905-9 f1g5950-515h.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Bush Katrina Bethany World Prayer Center.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Bush Katrina Bethany World Prayer Center.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wea00417.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Hurricane Carol Storm Surge in color 1954.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ike84.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Ike84.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yuri2.gif is now available as Commons:File:Yuri2.gif. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Hurricane Katrina fringe theories

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Hurricane Katrina fringe theories. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hurricane Katrina fringe theories. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of 2002 Tampa plane crash

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is 2002 Tampa plane crash. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2002 Tampa plane crash. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stormking2.jpg listed for deletion on Wikimedia Commons

An image or media file you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons or altered there, Stormking2.jpg, has been listed at Commons Deletion requests.

You can read and participate in the deletion discussion if you are interested or do not wish the file to be deleted. You may have to search for the title of the file to find its entry. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Nascartruck01-tn1a15a1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Nascartruck01-tn1a15a1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:02, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:NextelCup Bristol ScottWimmer-JoeNemechek-Contact-NemechekHeavyCrash 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:NextelCup Bristol ScottWimmer-JoeNemechek-Contact-NemechekHeavyCrash 1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 11:19, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Cleanup

Hello, Storm05. You are invited to join WikiProject Cleanup, a WikiProject and resource for Wikipedia cleanup listings, information and discussion. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alberto2000-08-07.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Alberto2000-08-07.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 17:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tcclim

Template:Tcclim has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 06:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cindy1963rdar.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cindy1963rdar.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 05:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:April Subtropical Storm.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:April Subtropical Storm.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 18:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page appearance: Tropical Storm Hermine (1998)

This is a note to let the main editors of Tropical Storm Hermine (1998) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on September 20, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 20, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Tropical Storm Hermine was the eighth tropical cyclone and named storm of the 1998 Atlantic hurricane season. Hermine developed from a tropical wave that emerged from the west coast of Africa on September 5. The wave moved westward across the Atlantic Ocean, and on entering the northwest Caribbean Sea interacted with other weather systems. The resultant system was declared a tropical depression on September 17 in the central Gulf of Mexico. The storm meandered north slowly, and after being upgraded to a tropical storm made landfall on Louisiana, where it quickly deteriorated into a tropical depression again on September 20. Before the storm's arrival, residents of Grand Isle, Louisiana, were evacuated. Rainfall spread from Louisiana through Georgia, causing isolated flash flooding. In some areas, the storm tide prolonged the coastal flooding from a tropical cyclone. Gusty winds were reported. Associated tornadoes in Mississippi damaged mobile homes and vehicles, and inflicted one injury. While Hermine was a weak storm and not particularly damaging, its effects combined with those of other tropical cyclones caused agricultural damage. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:Storm05/1959 Yellowstone earthquake listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User:Storm05/1959 Yellowstone earthquake. Since you had some involvement with the User:Storm05/1959 Yellowstone earthquake redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Dawnseeker2000 02:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperdimensional physics

Please check that before requesting a move. The dates in the article are in the early 21st century, not the mid 19th. DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 2007 Sanford Cessna 310 crash

The article 2007 Sanford Cessna 310 crash has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable aircraft crash. No Wikinotable personages involved, no long-term effects on aviation, no WP:PERSISTENCE.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:52, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings

The article Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Sourced entirely to UFO conspiracy sites, the one BBC piece is a small note that can easily be made in a broader article on UFO sightings.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Thargor Orlando (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Thargor Orlando (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of UFO sightings in Iraq for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article UFO sightings in Iraq is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UFO sightings in Iraq until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. LuckyLouie (talk) 15:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinking

Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.

I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

dates
years
commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

This applies to infoboxes, too.

Thanks, and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 11:39, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 1976 Canary Island UFO sighting for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1976 Canary Island UFO sighting is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1976 Canary Island UFO sighting until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. jps (talk) 15:16, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lightning in a tropical cyclone listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lightning in a tropical cyclone. Since you had some involvement with the Lightning in a tropical cyclone redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 17:16, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of UAV Corporation

The article UAV Corporation has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unsourced article about a defunct company.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. FeralOink (talk) 13:15, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Speedy Delete of April 1974 Tornado Outbreak Sequence

Your article about the April 1974 Tornado outbreak sequence has been requested for deletion because of being a major part of the 1974 Super Outbreak and could be merged into it. The page is also incomplete. HurricaneGonzalo (talk) 21:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hurricane! cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hurricane! cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Hurricane Lili (1990)

Hurricane Lili (1990) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Noah, AA^Talk 14:14, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]