This is an archive of past discussions with User:Titoxd. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
...has now gone to FARC. Delist votes will start to pile-up soon if nobody is working to address concerns brought up during FAR. --mav (reviews needed) 14:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome, been contributing to TCs on here for years and I just realized I never joined the project. -Marcusmax(speak) 20:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Request to our Wikipedians,
I'm very happy that my First Article has achieved B-Class on the very first day. After our fellow wikipedians comments, i have worked a lot to Improve my article. I have added a Lot to the article - Images,logos,Geographical Co-ordinates,Charts, Block Diagrams, Tables, National Stock Exchange Details, Criticism for Neutrality of the Article, Many Government web sources for proven references, etc. I have put all my effort to make it achieve Good Article Status. Now, I kindly request you to review My Article & provide your valuable feedback. Raj6644 (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Request to our Wikipedians,
I'm very happy that my First Article has achieved B-Class on the very first day. After our fellow wikipedians comments, i have worked a lot to Improve my article. I have added a Lot to the article - Images,logos,Geographical Co-ordinates,Charts, Block Diagrams, Tables, National Stock Exchange Details, Criticism for Neutrality of the Article, Many Government web sources for proven references, etc. I have put all my effort to make it achieve Good Article Status. Now, I kindly request you to review My Article & provide your valuable feedback. Raj6644 (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hurricane Patsy (1959) track update
I've put together a HURDAT version of a track update for Hurricane Patsy (1959). Could you update the file with this version when you get a chance? Thanks
Hi, I was referred to you by other editors in the tropical cyclone project. I would like to know if it possible for you to make an image of the tracks of all recorded Atlantic major hurricanes? Thank you, Bobby122Contact Me(C)19:20, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I have chucked all the data for the 2010 PTS so far in here so if you get chance could you please update the tracking maps for Conson and the season and create maps for 04W and the other TD. Many Thanks.Jason Rees (talk) 22:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I need a little help as the track generator isn't recognizing the name function for only Atlantic 2010 storms. I can get it to make the season map, but I cannot get the names working. Could this be something to do with the syntax of how the name must be written or something near it interfering?Syntheticalconnections (talk)(my contribs) 19:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I note that you speedily deleted a page under this name on 14 September 2006 (CSD:A8). Can I assume it is permissible for me to create an article for this noteworthy Delta bluesmusician (as here - [1]). Thanks,
This is the monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of August 2010.
Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.
Storm of the month Hurricane Frank is the storm of the Month.
Hurricane Frank
Tropical Depression Nine-E formed on August 21 south of the Gulf of Tehuantepec. It developed into a tropical storm the following morning. On August 23, Frank continued to intensify, but later faced shear and entered a period of weakening. However, on August 24, as shear decreased, it began to reorganize and strengthen again, becoming a hurricane on August 25. Two days later, Frank weakened into a tropical storm. Rapidly weakening overnight, NHC issued that it have been degraded into an remnant low. The area of low pressure associated with Frank was absorbed with another area of disturbed weather which later developed into Tropical Depression Ten-E.
Throughout Central America, Hurricane Frank produced torrential rain that resulted in at least 30 fatalities, most of which took place in Nicaragua and Honduras. In Guatemala alone, damage from the system was estimated to be up to $500 million. In Mexico, six deaths were reported. A total 30 homes were destroyed with 26 others damaged. Two major roads were damaged with another road blocked due to a landslides. Several rivers overflowed their banks as well. Losses from the storms totaled millions of dollars. Water Currents form a nearby volcano were damaged as well.
Other tropical cyclone activity
Atlantic Ocean– In the Atlantic Ocean, around three storms and one depression formed. Tropical Depression Four early on August 2. Early the next day, the depression strengthened further into a tropical storm and was named "Colin". Tropical Storm Colin was downgraded to a tropical depression late morning on August 8. Tropical Depression 5 formed on August 10, with no improvement, it dissipated within 24 hours. Tropical Depression Six developed near the Cape Verde Islands on August 21, the first of the series of Cape Verde-type storms. On August 22 the system attained tropical storm status, thus earning the name "Danielle" The next day it attained hurricane status, becoming the second of the season and strengthened further to a Category 2 hurricane. On August 27, Hurricane Danielle strengthened to a Category 3 hurricane, becoming the first major hurricane of the season, and further strengthened to a Category 4 hurricane shortly after.Danielle later weakened to a Category 3, then Category 2 hurricane, and later became a Category 1 Hurricane due to an eyewall replacement cycle, while avoiding land areas. It became extratropical early on August 31 southeast of Newfoundland without having directly impacted land. It was fully absorbed by a larger extratropical low on September 4 over Greenland. On August 25, Tropical Depression 7 formed east of Hurricane Danielle. Later that day it was upgraded to Tropical Storm Earl. On August 29, 2010 Earl strengthened to become the season's third hurricane. Earl then quickly intensified to become the season's second major hurricane on August 30. The hurricane weakened to a Category 3 hurricane after an eyewall replacement cycle before becoming a Category 4 again. Earl made landfall in the Canadian Maritime Provinces, twice in Nova Scotia and once in Prince Edward Island (PEI) at hurricane intensity. On August 30, when gale-force winds and better organization resulted in the development of Tropical Storm Fiona, skipping tropical depression status. It struggled to develop further, however, as it was hindered by high wind shear from the outflow of the much larger and stronger Earl.
Eastern Pacific Ocean– Three depressions formed in the Month of August. A tropical depression formed on August 5. slowly intensified, reaching tropical storm status on August 6. On August 9, it was downgraded into a tropical depression. On August 10th Estelle dissipated. Tropical Depression Eight-E formed on August 20. However, the depression weakened slightly overnight. The depression continued to weaken and the National Hurricane Center issued its final advisory on August 22. Tropical Depression Nine-E formed on August 21 south of the Gulf of Tehuantepec. It developed into a tropical storm the following morning. On August 25 it became a hurricane. Two days later, Frank weakened into a tropical storm. Rapidly weakening overnight, NHC issued that it have been degraded into an remnant low. Throughout Central America, Hurricane Frank produced torrential rain that resulted in at least 30 fatalities, most of which took place in Nicaragua and Honduras. In Guatemala alone, damage from the system was estimated to be up to $500 million. In Mexico, six deaths were reported. A total 30 homes were destroyed with 26 others damaged. Two major roads were damaged with another road blocked due to a landslides. Several rivers overflowed their banks as well. Losses from the storms totaled millions of dollars. Water Currents form a nearby volcano were damaged as well.
Western Pacific Ocean– Eight depression formed in the Month of August. Early on August 4, After Domeng, had merged with the low pressure area PAGASA reported that Domeng had intensified into a tropical storm and reached its 10-minute peak sustained windspeeds of 65 km/h (40 mph). In Luzon, heavy rain produced by the storm led to a few landslides, prompting road closures. Offshore, three people drowned after their boat capsized amidst rough seas produced by Domeng. Later that day PAGASA reported that Domeng had weakened into a tropical depression, before reporting early the next day that after it had passed through the Babuyan Islands, Domeng had weakened into an area of low pressure. Early on August 6, the JTWC reported that a tropical disturbance formed within the monsoon gyre about 800 km (500 mi) southeast of Taipei, Taiwan. During that day the JMA started to monitor the depression before the JTWC designated it as Tropical Depression 05W. The depression was then upgraded into a tropical storm by the JMA and named "Dianmu". After moving northward for several days, it turned northeastward and struck southern South Korea. Dianmu weakened as it crossed the Korean peninsula and emerged into the Sea of Japan. Heavy rains produced by the storm resulted in one fatality after a cargo ship sank amidst rough seas produced by the storm. This marked the first time in nine years that a rain-related fatality took place in the capital city of Seoul. More than 3,000 homes were destroyed in eastern China after heavy rains from the outer bands of Dianmu struck the region. The storm made landfall on Japan; exiting the country within five hours. Heavy rains were reported through out the islands. Nearly a week after the two ships sank off the coast of the Philippines, 31 crew members remain missing and are presumed dead after numerous coast guard rescue attempts. Damage from the storm on Jeju Island amounted to 5 billion won ($4.2 million USD). Early on August 17, an area of low pressure formed about 415 km (260 mi), northeast of Tuguegarao City, Cagayan. On the evening of August 18, as it crossed Babuyan Islands, the disturbance's low level center (LLC) weakened due to land interaction and high vertical wind shear. It regenerated on August 20 when it was located about 280 km (175 miles), to the west of Dagupan City, Pangasinan. Early on the next day, the LLCC of the disturbance became partially exposed due to a Tropical Upper Tropospheric Trough (TUTT) that was developing off Luzon at that time. On the afternoon of that day, Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) upgraded the system into a tropical depression. The next day, they further upgraded the depression into a tropical storm and named it "Mindulle". At the same time, the JTWC reported that Tropical Depression 06W has intensified into a tropical storm. Thousands of fishermen were urged to return to port. According to Vietnamese officials, contact was lost with 10 vessels on August 24 and the 137 fishermen on the ships were listed as missing. Rainfall, peaking at 297 mm (11.7 in),[59] led to significant flooding and agricultural losses. A Tropical depression formed on August 26, it survived for three days with no change in strength. it rapidly traveled northwest and dissipated on August 29. On August 28, the JMA upgraded the system to a Tropical Storm and was named "Lionrock". Early of september 1, Lionrock made a Fujiwhara effect with Namtheun, whilst Lionrock maintained it's strength while Namtheun was absorbed. Lionrock made landfall on the east coast of Guangdong Province, China, just north of the city of Shantou. It then started to dissipate and weaken into a tropical storm and moved over Guangzhou, Guangdong's capital. Lionrock soon lost it's intensity as it went over Guangdong. Midday of August 29, the Joint Typhoon Warning Centre (JTWC) issued a Tropical Cyclone Formation Alert (TCFA) on the system as a Low Level Circulation Centre had become organized. On the morning of that same day, the JTWC announced that the system had quickly developed into a tropical storm and assigned the designation "08W". Intensification continued, then by midday of August 30, the JMA reported that the depression had intensified into a tropical storm and assigned it the international designation "Kompasu". In addition, PAGASA also announced that the low pressure in the northeast of Batanes had formed and assigned it a local name, "Glenda". At the same time, the JTWC also upgraded Kompasu into a category 1 typhoon. On the next day, Kompasu crossed the island of Kadena and rapidly intensified into a category 2 typhoon equivalent. On September 1, Kompasu was upgraded by JTWC as a category 3 typhoon equivalent, becoming the strongest typhoon of the season. The storm later weakened to a category one typhoon in the Yellow Sea, before veering northeast and making landfall on Ganghwa Island, northwest of Incheon and Seoul, killing at least four people.[61] Kompasu was the strongest tropical storm to hit the Seoul metropolitan area in 15 years. On August 27, an extensive cloud formed in the waters east of Taiwan. On August 28, it developed into a low pressure. At 18:00, near Yaeyama Islands, the Japan Meteorological Agency upgraded the low pressure into a tropical depression. There were two tropical cyclones developing on both sides of 09W (namely Lionrock and Kompasu), and Typhoon Kompasu had a relatively stronger intensity, causing 09W moved southwest to Taiwan Strait. On August 30, it caused heavy rain in northern Taiwan. Taiwan's Central Weather Bureau could only issue a tropical depression warning since it had not strengthened to a tropical storm. At 20:00, 09W suddenly intensified into a tropical storm, and was named Namtheun. However, due to the development of another stronger tropical storm Lionrock at South China Sea, the increase of intensity of Namtheun was difficult. In the evening hours of August 31, Namtheun weakened into a tropical depression north of Taiwan Strait. Whilst Lionrock maintained it's strength while Namtheun was absorbed. Late on August 28, the Central Pacific Hurricane Center reported that an area of low pressure system associated with a tropical disturbance had developed about 1,000 mi (1,600 km) to the southwest of Honolulu in Hawaii. Isolated thunderstorms were developing in association with the small low-level circulation. During the next day the disturbance moved towards the west and moved into the western Pacific where the JMA immediately designated it as a tropical depression. The depression was expected to bring inclement weather to Majauro and nearby atolls, although the system significantly weakened before reaching the area.
Member of the month
Cyclone barnstar
The October member of the month is CrazyC83. Since joining the project near its inception, CrazyC83 has been involved in bringing twenty two articles to Good Article status and one article to Featured Article Status. Not only this, he is been working with the [[2010 Atlantic hurricane season 24/7. Our Favorite member Jason Rees looks like he has gone on a short break with the west, but he still continues with the east.
A tropical cyclone is a storm system characterized by a large low-pressure center and numerous thunderstorms that produce strong winds and heavy rain.
While tropical cyclones can produce extremely powerful winds and torrential rain, they are also able to produce high waves and damaging storm surge as well as spawning tornadoes.
The term "tropical" refers to both the geographic origin of these systems, which form almost exclusively in tropical regions of the globe, and their formation in maritime tropical air masses.
Many tropical cyclones develop when the atmospheric conditions around a weak disturbance in the atmosphere are favorable. The background environment is modulated by climatological cycles and patterns such as the Madden-Julian oscillation, El Niño-Southern Oscillation, and the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation.
Storm article statistics
Tropical cyclone articles by quality and importance
Category 3 Examples Under "Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale" Article
I am challenging your reversion of my addition of Hurricane Katrina (2005) as an example of a Category 3 hurricane.
Does your individual opinion trump the aggregate opinions expressed in the Hurricane Katrina article? This article unequivocally describes Hurricane Katrina as follows: "The storm weakened before making its second landfall as a Category 3 storm on the morning of Monday, August 29 in southeast Louisiana."
Katrina is a bad example. It was a Cat. 5, and the article says "Storms of this intensity include...", and when it made landfall, it made landfall as a Cat 3 with a cat 5 storm surge. Darren23Edits|Mail20:42, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Dvorak chart
Very nice! Looks much prettier and more professional. Also very informational and great use of color to help the reader navigate what is kind of a long chart. TimL (talk) 21:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Help regarding Copy Editing...
Hello, i want your help regarding the copy editing, general fixes and grammatical mistakes in the following articles related to Meteorology.
On 30 September 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Ecuador crisis, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
About the template you made Template:Highest ACE Atlantic hurricane seasons navbox, I recently created a table for the ACE totals on the 1998 season page and discovered the totals were extremely close to those in 1887. So I consulted with the Talk:Accumulated cyclone energy/Atlantic by year page and added up all of the numbers of ACE for both 1887 and 1998. With all of the numbers added up, 1887 had a total of about 181.565 (it was rounded to 182 on the 1887 page) and 1998 was at 181.77; which means that the 1887 Atlantic hurricane season is incorrectly listed as 10th highest on that template, but it should actually be 1998. --12george1 (talk) 16:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you won't mind my saying this, but the paragraph you inserted on the etymology of the word "typhoon" seems a little high-handed, incomplete and poorly referenced. You mention only an Asian etymology (itself somewhat questionable: why Mandarin, not Cantonese, or Japanese?), without mention of the well-documented Greek/Arabic/Portuguese/etc. etymologies. And your reference, a Chinese popularizing site, hardly seems authoritative. See for example the discussion in the Typhoon talk page or Tropical_cyclone#Origin_of_storm_terms. Would you mind if I updated your paragraph to include more information and references on this? --Kai Carver (talk) 06:06, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
My name is Sophia and I am a PhD student at University of Colorado in Boulder researching the use of social media for historically significant crises like Hurricane Katrina. I am interested in what kind of values and practices are emerging from these disasters especially with the use of ubiquitous technologies like blogs and social media sites like Wikipedia. I am contacting you because I noticed you are one of the top contributors of the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article. I was wondering if you would be open to answering some questions for my dissertation research on this topic. One example of a question I have is: You provided a considerable amount of edits to the Hurricane Katrina Wikipedia article. What kind of edits did you make? What story was being told before you edited the article and how does that differ from what is in Wikipedia now? Feel free to email me at Sophia.Liu@colorado.edu if you have any questions. Thanks for your time, Sophia --Sophiabliu (talk) 05:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
NWP
I've asked Feline Hymnic (hope I spelled that right) to look over the NWP article. They had some input a couple years back, and just made an edit. Hopefully, they'll be able to provide some of the input we've been lacking from others. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. To clarify. I have no meteorological training at all, although I do have a science background (my previous day-job for many years was systems admin. of UNIX computers in a major science-research university in the UK). So my comments are highlighting the questions that arise as I read the article, and that perhaps need expansion for a non-met audience. (Where the answer is reasonably obvious to me, I'm editing the article, but where there is doubt in my mind, I'm leaving a comment on the talk page.) Hope that helps. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The version of the book I found online did not pass page 45. Do you have a link to the figure they're talking about? The second reviewer's comments are why other science folk on wikipedia tend not to take the GAN/FAC process seriously (all referencing issues, no content issues). If they're not going to delve into the referencing to look for issues with the text of the article, how do they know it is FAC worthy? Thegreatdr (talk) 20:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I've pinged Short_Brigade_Harvester_Boris, who has been critical of met articles after the FAC/GAN process has ended. He could provide some good feedback. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
The flow chart may be simplistic, but it might help the lay reader understand what's going on. BTW...do we discuss MOS in this article? =O If not, we should. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll be back to the NWP article on Tuesday, when I have a few days off to work on issues. I'm nearing the end of my workweek. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
I've moved relevant content from this article to atmospheric model, and have begun adding a paramaterization section to the Atmospheric model article. Since no one has brought it up (yet?) within the NWP article, I'm keeping this content out of it for the time being. A parameterization section within the NWP article could become extremely involved, as it would have to talk about ocean modeling, tropical cyclone modeling, and AQ modeling as well. Just know that it is being added to the Atmospheric model and parametrization (climate) articles, in case the issue comes up. It looks like you've taken care of the issues that have arisen over the past 2-3 days within the NWP FAC. Thegreatdr (talk) 13:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
History of numerical weather prediction article has been created as a subarticle, which allows us to get around the previous information duplication noted by the latest FAC commenter. A WikiBot has flagged it, since the NWP article was mirrored on another website, and it thinks I copied it off the internet. Oy. Thegreatdr (talk) 15:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
That's probably fine. I don't think that info is duplicated elsewhere in the article. It did solve the problem of talking about types of models multiple times, which I think was our reviewer's concern. Won't know until they provide feedback though. Back to copyediting 1953 AHS.... Thegreatdr (talk) 22:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Made changes to the history and climate sections per FAC comments. So far, their suggestions have been specific enough that the issues have been fixable. I'm back on shifts (nights), so my wikipedia time is limited for the next several days, but I'll do what I can when I can. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm back editing for another four days (days off). We seem to be getting one support per week in the FAC review. I'm trying to get more info from the second to last commentor about what is still missing here. I don't think this article is the place for all the math...several of the subarticles accomplish this task. I trying to fill out more info within the calc section per their comments though, where possible. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:30, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Added a new section on wildfires, which actually had a decent article already prepared on wikipedia. It originally used a rather non-wiki style, which I attempted to fix. Hopefully, this does not add much more work for us during FAC, which hasn't had a comment in many hours as it is. Thegreatdr (talk) 01:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I made some changes to the last section, per the most recent FAC comments. I don't think wikipedia standards allow us to write a final summary...this isn't a high school/college essay. When you proposed this as a group project back in December, is this what you envisioned? We've now spent almost 3 months on the improvement of this article. The sea surface temperature, weather buoy, and History of numerical weather prediction articles have successfully navigated GAN. Tropical cyclone forecast model is currently on GAN, and weather ship and spaghetti plot upgraded. You never know how a prospective FA is going to lead to broad changes within its supporting articles, and the met/TC projects as a whole. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji02:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Benfjensen image?
I understand your concern about fair use, but it is already on the page of the Congressman. However, why is it in the wrong column? It appears in the correct column of the table.Naraht (talk) 20:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
The image is definitely public domain. MatthewVanitas, the user who uploaded it, mistakenly thought it was a fair use image. I have since changed the licensing information on the file page. Also, Titoxd you really need to archive your talk page, it's way too long and took a while to load. Cheers. – Zntrip22:28, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm still trying to figure out how editing numerical weather prediction got me over into an article which had previously been within the realm of the global warming set of articles. Anyway, could you look over the general appearance of this article, and let me know if I've made much of an improvement there over the past several days? It's a dicey proposition to edit any of the climate change-related articles, but in this case, like urban heat island a couple years back, it begged for wikification. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Tips on newpage and edit patrol?
Ello Titoxd, I've been noticing that I've been making a lot of reversions to pages that you've either recently reverted, or that I go to revert something and you've already beat me to the punch. I did a fair bit of newpage patrolling and vandalism watching last year, but really haven't done so in a long time (and was never that knowledgeable on it in the first place--though I did manage to get rollback, and how I did that is beyond me).
Any chance you can reference a decent tutorial or article, sort of a "newcomers guide to patrolling"? I know some of the basics, but occasionally I make an incorrect reversion or incorrectly tag an article for speedy deletion, and people tend to get cranky about it (understandably). I've skimmed through some of the articles like Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions and similar ones, but maybe you know of some tailored specifically to what I'm doing? (feel free to see my recent revisions, or a related complaint on my talk page). I use Huggle to keep an eye on the edit feed, and I use Twinkle for newpage patrol and for ease of adding warnings sometimes.
Hello! You've asked to poke you when Dakar is concluded. The time has come I think. Also I hope you may be so kind as to post Chagin's record, even despite there are 50% to 50% pro and contra votes in the discussion. The ITN/R sports news are boring without winners. GreyHoodTalk16:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Why the removal of the citation dealing with coriolis? Was the proof not within the citation, or was the citation not considered primary? Thegreatdr (talk) 21:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi there. In this edit you removed my report as "stale". Can you please help me understand what a stale report is? The last edit made by the IP (which I had to revert) was at 05:00, 11 February 2011. My report was at 09:21, 11 February 2011. You removed the report at 10:49, 11 February 2011. --Muhandes (talk) 16:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I removed that report since the IP had not made any edits in the last five hours, so for our purposes he/she stopped vandalizing. If the IP resumes making those sorts of edits, he can be re-reported without any problems. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)19:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer, but he most probably just went to sleep. This is not a rotating IP - this is an editor with a long history, this being the third offense on the same articles. Every time he decides to vandalize I spend two hours undoing it, which I really don't like, so understand why I care when my report goes ignored. Of course, I can report it next time, but that will still cause two hours lost of my time. But if these are the rules, though they are not smart, I guess there is nothing I can do. --Muhandes (talk) 20:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
If this has been going on for a while, you can report it at WP:AN/I and everyone will take a look at it, and determine whether longer-term blocks are necessary. AIV's purpose is to deal with problems that are occurring as we speak, and thus reports that are several hours old probably won't get acted on there. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff)20:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Okay. Thanks! I did not know that you could do that. And the fake hurricane season articles are just practice so I can do better in future articles and edits. The only reason I do not delete the pages is because I want to try editing those, for even more practice. Another reason is because I like to read over them, and see how good I have done. Again, I edit those pages, for practice so I can be better at editing real articles. Thanks again for the helpful information, I will get on that.--Ryder 02:46, 14 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryder Busby (talk • contribs)
Firstly let me state that I am aware of WP:WRONGVERSION, however I stil think you have protected this in the wrong place as I don't think that as a general rule wrong version should apply to pages where an ongoing move discussion is taken place - it should be protected at the stable version. There's a simple reason for this - it screw's up the requested move discussion. I've seen them closed as already moved (not least because the tag effectively says this), people vote the wrong way because they get confused and all sorts of other silliness go on when a page is moved in the middle of the discussion and for this reason such moves are normally reverted. Protecting the page is the "non-stable" location will only make the discussion harder. Therefore I ask that you apply some common sense and move it back. That said I realise that I'm involved in the discussion (although that's not my reason for asking for it to be moved back) and that wrong version is generally accepted so I'd understand if you don't. I would start an RfC on whether wrongversion should apply in cases like this but it would probably get so little participation as to be worthless. Dpmuk (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Thought that may be your response. As I say i think the protection policy is wrong in this instance and I'd have hoped you'd have ignored all rules although I can fully understand your reluctance to do so. I've seen this issue a few times (as I generally help out as much as a non-admin can at WP:RM) and do think it's an issue. I will start an RfC at some point as if it's in the protection policy that it should be protected at the name that was in use when the RM started then it's a clear cut policy and admins would be able to point to it as their reasoning and still have the same level of "neutrality". Dpmuk (talk) 11:17, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Council for an upcoming edition of The Signpost. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, you can find the interview questions here. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. If you have any questions, you can leave a note on my talk page. Have a great day. – SMasters (talk) 16:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
For helping out with GAN, when I suddenly became snowed under...
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
I hereby award thee the Random Acts of Kindness barnstar for helping out with the Tropical Cyclone Forecast Model GAN when two other GAN nominations suddenly became active. Thegreatdr (talk) 00:30, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
For your work on the TC project
The WikiProject Barnstar
You are the only person in the TC project who can get this barnstar, since you are its founder. Even after 5.5 years, you continue to try to improve the project through efforts such as collaboration of the fortnight. It is appreciated. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:16, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
It's been a while since I've worked on the MoS at all, but I figured that I'd go and add a simple little "see also" link that should be non-controversial (which, I know, it being the MoS, I'm probably being overly optimistic, but still) only to find that the page has been full protected for more than 2 months now.
So, I go to the talk page to see what's up, only to find... nothing. Luckily, I'm experienced enough to know that I need to look at the archive. Sure enough, I see that the issue is the (ongoing?) dash war. *sigh*
Anyway, I was about to start another discussion on the MoS talk page, but I figured that I'd come to you first as just ask for un-protection. Granted, Tony, PMA, Noetica, etc... are probably watching your talk page, so my hope that a quiet un-protection will allow things to proceed smoothly is likely just wishful thinking. Still, I wanted to at least ask, and see what happened. "Nothing ventured...", and all. Regards, — V = IR(Talk • Contribs)02:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi there Titoxd! Just a line to say a huge THANK YOU for taking care of the article. It gets a bit lonely there sometimes! Greetings! --Izmir2(Speak you mind)—Preceding undated comment added 01:43, 9 June 2011 (UTC).
.jpg){kind=link}
