Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Archive 50

Archive 45

←

Archive 48

Archive 49

Archive 50

Village Pump discussion on information pertaining to current storms

I have posted a discussion at Village Pump (Policy) as a followup to the ANI thread on how to handle information on current tropical cyclones. It can be found at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Wikiproject procedures for WP:NOTNEWS in reference to active storms. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:22, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Units again

My proposal is to use metric units first in infoboxes and meteorological history sections in Atlantic and Pacific hurricane articles. This is because countries affected by these hurricanes include number of countries using entirely or almost entirely metric units. Only impacts in the United States would use imperial units first. For example, storms impacting both Mexico and US would use metric first in section of impacts in Mexico and imperial first in section of impacts in US. And possibly Belize and Bahamas would use imperial units too. This is example of metric units first in article of Hurricane Otis:

Hurricane Otis was a compact but very powerful tropical cyclone which made a devastating landfall in October 2023 near Acapulco as a Category 5 hurricane. Otis was the first Pacific hurricane to make landfall at Category 5 intensity and surpassed Hurricane Patricia as the strongest landfalling Pacific hurricane on record. The resulting damage made Otis the costliest tropical cyclone to strike Mexico on record. The fifteenth tropical storm, tenth hurricane, eighth major hurricane, and second Category 5 hurricane of the 2023 Pacific hurricane season, Otis originated from a disturbance several hundred kilometers south of the Gulf of Tehuantepec. Initially forecast to stay offshore and to only be a weak tropical storm at peak intensity, Otis instead underwent explosive intensification to reach peak winds of 270 km/h (170 mph) and weakened only slightly before making landfall as a powerful Category 5 hurricane. Once inland, the hurricane quickly weakened before dissipating the following day.[...] Light to moderate southeasterly wind shear displaced convection northwest of Otis's surface circulation during the overnight hours of October 22–23. The lack of vertical alignment and dry mid-level air delayed potential intensification despite an otherwise favorable environment consisting of high sea surface temperatures and abundant atmospheric moisture. Sea surface temperatures ahead of the system averaged 30–31 °C (86–88 °F), above average for this time of year. The high temperatures resulted from a combination of a record-warm September for Mexico, an ongoing El Niño, and the influence of global warming. The system's motion shifted from due north to north-northwest during this time, remaining around 6–8 km/h (4–5 mph). A convective band developed halfway around the storm by the afternoon of October 23, and the surface circulation and thunderstorm activity moved closer together. During the overnight of October 23–24, the storm moved into a region of more favorable conditions, with higher sea surface temperatures and weaker vertical wind shear. Microwave satellite imagery depicted a low-level ring structure, often a precursor to rapid intensification, despite the overall sheared appearance of the system. The storm's forward motion also increased during this time, potentially offsetting the negative impacts of southeasterly wind shear. As a result, upper-level outflow expanded noticeably and the system's core became centered in the convection. This led to Otis beginning an intensification phase that would continue until landfall. As the morning of October 24 progressed, outflow continued to expand in all directions atop Otis and many banding features circulated the storm. The improvement in outflow was accentuated by a powerful jet streak—a wind maxima within the jet stream—which accelerated the rate of latent heat dispersal and fostered convective development. Otis commenced explosive intensification and became a hurricane by 12:00 UTC (07:00 CDT) on October 24. [...] --40bus (talk) 07:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

• Support. Right now, this is a factor of the Infobox weather event displaying the units for a basin, I believe. Hurricane Juan, an Atlantic hurricane affecting Canada, should absolutely have the metric units first. I believe it could be easy to change the programming for Infobox weather event to be something like: unit = metric. Especially since that infobox is now used worldwide. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Hurricanehink: why not just display metric first globally since it would be confusing to do it for a few specific countries. Most TCs affect more than one country anyways. Noah, BSBA^Talk 20:13, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  Yea, make metric the default, and maybe just have a coding switch if it's primarily affecting the US? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Hurricanehink: What Im saying is just use metric first regardless of country which would harmonize things globally. Every country except the US uses metric within the NHC AORs. I don't see a need to use customary units first in any article since it would make things disorderly within a set of season articles. Better to just make them all the same. Noah, BSBA^Talk 00:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

  I agree if the US used the metric system, that would harmonize things globally for sure! Unfortunately the US abandoned their efforts to metricate in the 1990s. Also, the NHC uses imperial units as the default, which could be enough justification for keeping Atlantic hurricane season articles as using imperial units first, even if some seasons might feature more systems impacting metric-using countries. Also, this being the English Wikipedia, the US accounts for majority of the views. So, in an ideal world, yea, we'd use metric system first, but I think there should be an exception for US storms and the AHS. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move for Hurricane Alley

Hello! I've requested for Hurricane Alley to be moved to Main Development Region, with the associated move discussion located on the talk page. Your input would be welcome! ArkHyena (talk) 02:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Can someone confirm if this image is Hurricane Floyd or Hurricane Fran?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hurricane_in_the_1990s.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hurricane_off_the_east_coast_sometime_in_the_1990s.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hurricane_off_the_east_coast_in_the_1990s.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hurricane_off_the_east_coast_in_the_90s_2.png CurlyHeadCel (talk) 00:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Well where did you get those images? Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 02:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

NOAA/NASA CurlyHeadCel (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yea, like what website? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

some NOAA archive website I forgot the name of CurlyHeadCel (talk) 01:58, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

It will probably get deleted if you can't remember the name of the website. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

https://earthdata.nasa.gov/ CurlyHeadCel (talk) 02:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused. These are all images of Hurricane Humberto (2019) with weird filters applied to make it look like they were old images. I'm not sure if they fall in the scope of either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. —TheAustinMan^{(Talk ⬩ Edits)} 01:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Can you confirm it's not Floyd? CurlyHeadCel (talk) 01:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@CurlyHeadCel: yes, I am 100% certain that is not Floyd, and 100% certain that Humberto is the hurricane depicted. —TheAustinMan^{(Talk ⬩ Edits)} 02:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Why do you 100% think it's not Floyd but some other hurricane CurlyHeadCel (talk) 02:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

As I stated elsewhere, a lot of these photographs have 1960s and 1970s quality, not late-1990s as you claim. You are misrepresenting these images at the very least. Im quite convinced TAM is correct given the similarities I have seen between the Humberto images and the ones you have posted. The resemblance is almost uncanny. Noah, BSBA^Talk 02:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Can you please provide me the images that uncannily resemble the edited images then bhai? I got them from the link pasted saar CurlyHeadCel (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Image 3 is almost the exact same as the first image on Hurricane Humberto (2019). ✶Quxyz✶ 02:28, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Is it the cloud formations, cloud size, eye area? CurlyHeadCel (talk) 02:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Did you edit the images? That’s the real question here. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 02:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Here is the source of all four images. ✶Quxyz✶ 02:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

yeah the person had some creepy PFP as well CurlyHeadCel (talk) 02:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

no. I actually found them on discord and I was told they were from a NASA archive from the person who posted them CurlyHeadCel (talk) 02:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Tropical Storm Debby (2006)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Tropical Storm Debby (2006)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please follow the (Discuss) link at the top of the article to participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Flux55

Merger discussion for Hurricane Joyce (2000)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Hurricane Joyce (2000)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please follow the (Discuss) link at the top of the article to participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Flux55

Nomination for deletion of Template:Hurricane Dennis series

Template:Hurricane Dennis series has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. 19:04, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

2005 Atlantic hurricane season 20 year anniversary approaching

See here for the discussions and collaborations regarding the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, one of the busiest and most destructive seasons, with two hurricanes causing over 1,000 deaths, five retired hurricanes, and 26 articles in total. A featured topic would require 13 featured articles, with all of the retired storms rated at least a good article (and ideally one of the featured). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:10, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Should the year be included in the short description of certain articles?

I have been removing the year from short descriptions in articles that already include the year in their title. I believe that including the year in the short description is redundant and unnecessary, as the title itself already contains the year. The year in the title provides enough context, and using it in the short description is not helpful. However, some other editors have disagreed with my changes, pointing out that other tropical cyclone articles do include the year in the short description. Their argument is not convincing, as they have not provided a strong reason for keeping the year in the short description of those articles, and the same rule could be applied to them as well.

For an article with the title Hurricane X (year), I support the following changes to the short description:

−

Category Y (basin) hurricane in (year)

+

Category Y (basin) hurricane

Your feedback is appreciated. _ZZ^Z'S 15:29, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Zzzs Sorry no one’s responded to this. I think adding the year to the short description is only necessary when the cyclones don’t have a year in their title, so I’d support this proposal. But making all the short descriptions uniform is an undertaking in itself. JayTee⛈️ 04:20, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

2023–24 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season

@MarioProtIV or others: Could anyone fix the final season trackmap since the season is already over? I do not know how to create season summary maps, so thank you to whoever makes it. The map looks like it is missing Ialy and 25S. I would also like to learn how to make these, so please ping me if you would like to teach me. Thank you! 2003 LN6 04:45, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I will try to get to them soon, but I have mostly done the Atlantic maps so far, so I will see what I can do. MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 04:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! It would be greatly appreciated if you could tell me how to make full-season track maps. 2003 LN6 22:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Date formats for NIO season articles

Throughout many articles covering North Indian Ocean cyclone seasons, MDY format is used. However, a few outliers—including the 2024 and 2016 articles—use DMY. Not only is this inconsistent, but per MOS:DATETIES DMY should be used instead of MDY. No country in the basin, much less the very RSMC that officially monitors it, predominantly uses MDY format. What reasoning, if any, is there for these articles to use MDY? ArkHyena (talk) 15:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation hatnotes

So is there a clear consensus on how hatnotes should be used in tropical cyclone articles (or rather, how readers are directed to articles of other storms with the same name)? It bothers me seeing hatnotes on articles of storms that are clearly distinguishable by the year in the title. I took a look at two discussions about this and thought there was an agreement about only keeping the hatnotes on clearly more significant tropical cyclones, and maybe remove them on articles of less significant tropical cyclones. This would comply with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:NOTAMB, and I also suggest that disambiguation pages should only be in the "See also" section of less significant storms. —JCMLuis 💬 16:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I would rather only see them in articles about a specific system and not seasonal articles, where they look rather out of place.Jason Rees (talk) 18:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe there is a clear consensus. If the title is clearly distinguishable by the year, then I don't think one is needed, as I stated in the two discussions that you mentioned. I think most of the disambiguation pages should be merged into the individual "List of named storms" by letter. It's essentially naming trivia for a bunch of storms that otherwise have no relationship to each other. For example, in Hurricane Cindy (2005), I just moved List of storms named Cindy down to see also. But honestly that same page isn't cited, and doesn't have all that much more than what's in List of named storms (C). And that page is useful since they might've been looking for Cinda (which is listed right above Cindy). Or maybe Cynthia. On the other hand, check out the beginning of Hurricane Dennis, which has List of storms named Dennis (since there's a chance they might've been looking for the Dennis in 1981 or 1999), as well as List of storms named Denise due to the potential for the name ambiguity. So I suppose that's a good example of when we need the hatnotes, when there is a legit chance for confusion. But the next storm of 2005, Hurricane Emily (2005), also had a hatnote, for no real reason considering that the page already has the year in the title, so I moved that hatnote down to the see also - "Other storms of the same name". So I don't know if it's a consensus exactly, but IMO there shouldn't be any hatnotes when the year is in the title, or in the cases where the year still doesn't help (like Tropical Storm Linda (1997) needing to also mention Hurricane Linda (1997) in the same year, just in a different basin). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

This seems like a pretty good evaluation of the situation. My one concern with merging "List of storms named X" articles is that the List of named storms by letter articles seem to be a bit incomplete. I might go through it and try to beef up some of the descriptions that are no more than an en dash. ✶Quxyz✶ 20:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Most of the "List of storms named X" articles are based on the hundreds of dab pages. There's still the problem that they're largely unsourced. I think they could actually be featured lists, and a fantastic way of linking every named storm, if they were improved, and had sources for each storm/description. Not sure if that's what you had in mind, but it would be a great way of paralleling the other ways that people can find every storm: storms by area (like List of Florida hurricanes), storms by year/basin (tropical cyclones in 1991/1991 Pacific typhoon season), and storms by intensity (like List of Atlantic tropical storms). The "List of storms named X" adds another way for readers to accomplish that, and probably a lot better than relying on the hundreds of the dab/set index article pages. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:01, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I believed the common practice was to include hatnotes only for systems without the year in the title, which would satisfy WP:NOTAMB as you have brought up, and at one point I went around trying to move the "List of storms named X" links to the See also sections instead. Over the past 2 or 3 years I've seen most of that undone, though I haven't really been around enough recently to notice by whom. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 16:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

That's a shame. Not sure if we need to make it an official policy, but the hatnotes and such have always annoyed me a bit, mostly for how messy they make the top of the pages. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Unusual things I have observed in IBTRACS.

While looking at the 1971 Pacific Typhoon season's IBTRACS page, I saw that some storms (Like the first system, Sarah) were repeated. Why is this? The Wikipedia page for the 1971 Pacific Typhoon season alludes to some systems (like Super Typhoon Lucy) having some sort of secondary system, but what else?--The Space Enthusiast (talk) 00:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

@The Space Enthusiast: The simple answer is that the computer program that IBTRACS uses to combine the BT Data, sometimes thinks that there is a second system when there is a significant difference between the average position and an agencies position. Some of these so called spur tracks are being fixed with time, research and systems being reanalysed.Jason Rees (talk) 01:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!--The Space Enthusiast (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Suggestions

Hello! I'm a new participant and helper and I have a few suggestions (though most of them might be far-fetched).

• Suggestion 1: For the requested articles list, is there a way to archive the finished articles? More-so date-archiving them?
• Suggestion 2: I've always thought competitions were a cool idea, since it's a little quiet here, how about starting another Cyclone Cup?
• Suggestion 3: Just saw that there was a Peer review section in WIkiProject Mining. Since PR's are barely responded to, why can't we make a section to help the effort?

These are my suggestions for the WikiProject. I understand if you oppose them. Thanks, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 11:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs). I think your second one has the best chance of happening, if we have enough editors/writers. As for peer reviews, that is typically done on an informal basis. It requires people wanting to reviews, give feedback, and help improve an article. Again, if we have a list of people willing to review, then it could maybe work. As for the first one, I don't think articles that were once on the request list should be treated any differently than other existing articles. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Validate an edit

A change was made to 1954 in the United States. An editor changed "[[Hurricane Hazel]] makes U.S. landfall; it is the only recorded [[Category 4 hurricane]] to strike as far north as [[North Carolina]]." to "[[Hurricane Hazel]] makes U.S. landfall; it is the first recorded [[Category 4 hurricane]] to strike as far north as [[North Carolina]]."

I just came by to ensure that this is correct. Dawnseeker2000 05:14, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

You can see in List of United States hurricanes that Hazel indeed is the only Cat 4 to hit North Carolina or anywhere else farther north. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Template:Costliest U.S. Atlantic hurricanes

I came across the template while looking at Hurricane Helene, and I think the intensity at landfall is a bit misleading. Yes, Katrina was officially a Cat 3, and Sandy was extratropical at landfall, but I don't think the categories help, since in some instances it makes a storm seem not as bad - Ike as a Cat 2. If no one opposes, I'll remove the categories for landfall. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Neutral – I’m not opposed; but I’m not going to explicitly say that I support it either. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 20:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Hurricane lists

Why hasn’t anyone thought of making a list of major (cat 3+) hurricane landfalls in the United States?

My proposed list would ONLY include storms that were cat 3+ at the time of landfall (eg: Ian) and in a separate list (in the same article) storms that were close enough to the US to bring major hurricane conditions even if a direct landfall was avoided (eg: Matthew). It would NOT include hurricanes that were at one point cat 3+ but did not make landfall/impact as a cat 3+ (eg: Beryl). Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 12:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

I like the idea but you would have to include systems such as Val 91, Paka and Yutu which came close enough to the "United States" to cause major hurricane conditions, but were not officially classified on the SSHWS.Jason Rees (talk) 13:21, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Too similar to List of United States hurricanes IMO. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 18:11, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Is there any way we can add a section (on the list of United States hurricanes) that solely singles out major hurricane landfalls then? Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 19:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

If it's OK Hurricane Clyde (talk · contribs), I'd like to expand on your idea, and continue the discussion on the talk page for List of United States hurricanes. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Discussion on the reliability of Wayne Neely

There is a discussion on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard about "The Great Bahamas Hurricane of 1866" by Wayne Neely, editor witb subject knowledge would be appreciated. See WP:RSN#Bahamas Department of Meteorology history. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

GIBBS is down

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/gibbs/, a site for looking up satellite images of the Earth since 1966, has not been up since Hurricane Helene hit. Because I want to see imagery of the late 60's and early 70's tropical cyclone seasons, particularly the Western Pacific ones, where could I get the satellite data? I have seen several websites with satellite data, such as ESSA-9, but they may need an account.The Space Enthusiast (talk) 23:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Units

In many Atlantic and Pacific hurricane articles, sections about impacts in Mexico use imperial units first, despite that Mexico uses metric system exclusively. In many instances, the sources give metric units but then these are then flipped to show imperial units first. They should have metric units first to reflect practices in Mexico. --40bus (talk) 20:47, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree, if the storm article is about Mexico, then it should have metric units first. Not every article is properly formatted. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 23:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Can I join this WikiProject?

I want to help the Tropical Cyclone WikiProject in any way. Can I please join, because I “wanna go for a spin”. HurricaneKirk2024 (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I’m just obsessed with hurricanes tbh and Nadine (Invest 94L) is coming so HurricaneKirk2024 (talk) 02:25, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

If you want to join WPTC, you can add your name to the current members at the bottom of the list, under the last person who joined. You can then add the following to your user page. Based on your editing history and comments I recommend you become familiar with Wikipedia's style of writing and core policies so you can start editing tropical cyclone articles. Also note you don't have to ask permission to join a Wikiproject or make an edit. JayTee⛈️ 16:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

This user participates in
WikiProject Tropical cyclones.

Climate Change effects on hurricanes

Should we mention the effects of climate change on hurricanes in every hurricane article? There appears to be no consensus, with some people wanting to make climate change info its own subsection, others wanting to just add a paragraph on it, and a third group that does not want to add it at all for repetition/RS issues(since Tropical cyclones and climate change applies to every tropical cyclone). Wildfireupdateman (talk) 20:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Personally I think no. It comes up with almost every landfalling major hurricane, because there happen to be sources that talk about it. For example, if the climate change bit was about rainfall, or higher water temperatures, just mention them without the "climate change", which is more about the broad patterns and not any individual storm. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft for PTC Eight?

I think we need an article/draft for Eight. It caused one (indirect) fatality, and made minor flooding in the Carolinas. This “tropical disturbance” only lasted two days; but with enough sources, I think it might be able to have an article.

• To be honest, I think any storm that causes a fatality should have an article.

HurricaneKirk2024 (talk) 16:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

There's already a discussion about that on the 2024 AHS talk page. Also, that rule (any storm that causes a fatality gets an article) is impractical. Too many old historical storms that caused a death or two that couldn't support a sub-article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

ok HurricaneKirk2024 (talk) 17:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Tropical Storm Conson (2021)#Requested move 8 September 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tropical Storm Conson (2021)#Requested move 8 September 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. asilvering (talk) 00:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Does being a Category 5 Pacific hurricane establish notability?

Per the recommendation of @Jasper Deng I'm going to start a broader project discussion about this. As the subheading states, does being a Category 5 hurricane alone establish a Pacific hurricane as notable? Apparently there is standing project precedent that all Category 5 Pacific hurricanes get their own articles. I don't think this precedent should really be in place to begin with. While it's true Category 5 hurricanes are less common in the Pacific than the Atlantic, I think a storm intensifying to Category 5 status then weakening without affecting land or setting any meteorological records doesn't establish its notability. What's more, these storms generally don't receive news coverage that goes beyond stating what the NHC had already said about the storm intensity-wise, so this doesn't seem to meet the "Significant coverage" metric of WP:GNG. Additionally, simply stating the storm's meteorological history and data without any other significant information seems to be violating WP:NOTPLOT. Looking for comments on whether this precedent should stand as it directly affects an article for an active storm. JayTee⛈️ 00:29, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

It should. WP:NOTPLOT applies to human works and does not apply to real-life events. Hurricane Celia (2010) is a similar storm to Kristy and although its records aren't truly records in the sense of first place in anything (except strongest June hurricane), they're enough to warrant a section.

GNG is not a problem with the RS coverage we do have; the NHC is the WP:PRIMARY source with the other news articles the needed WP:SECONDARY sources. We can easily flesh out enough material to satisfy WP:SPLIT for all such storms. The question should be how do we serve our readers best, and Cat 5's are one of the most sought-after topics for readers in this basin.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

For Kristy specifically, could we tack it onto Nadine like with Tropical storms Amanda and Cristobal? ✶Quxyz✶ 00:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Very few sources join the two in the way Amanda and Cristobal did, so probably not. But that could be a better alternative than not having an article at all for Kristy.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I would agree as, if Kristy has no other notability, it would be the better route. For the conversation as a whole, I believe that Category 5s shouldn't have inherent notability. Possibly, they could have lower standards but fish-storm Category 5s without any records should not have articles. ✶Quxyz✶ 01:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Several sources directly connect the remnants of Nadine with the formation of Kristy, as will official season summaries and TCRs I'm sure. A combined Nadine–Kristy article would have both notability, and a depth that the Nadine article lacks due to its small-scale impact, and a Kristy article would lack due to it being a Category 5 fish storm without any records or land affects to its name. Drdpw (talk) 01:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I am creating the merge request now. ✶Quxyz✶ 01:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Hold your horses. The idea of merging the two needs a separate discussion on one of the talk pages and a consensus therefore.--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:42, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

To the main subject of this discussion, not every notable topic needs a standalone pages, or in this instance, not every Category 5 hurricane needs its own article. The question is, "how best to help readers understand the subject." For a system like Kristy, the best way might well be through a well written section in the season article. Drdpw (talk) 01:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Hard disagree. A reader looking into the intricacies of things like eyewall replacement cycles and the overall genesis process for the strongest storms will not be satisfied by the season article section. A reader coming from List of Category 5 Pacific hurricanes is also unlikely to be interested in the rest of the season. Jasper Deng (talk) 01:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

While it is less common for a Pacific storm to reach category five, it seems to me that that alone isn't and shouldn't be enough for an article, as most people above have stated like Drdpw. Shmego (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Category 5 status does not confer notability automatically. To Jasper's point, eyewall replacement cycles are often mentioned in season articles, but if that only happens once, and the storm weakens over land, then it can easily be summarized in the season article. I could see storms like Hurricane Elida (2002) and Hurricane Hernan (2002) getting merged. I mention those two as examples because the 2002 Pacific hurricane season is under 5,000 words, so an expansion is warranted. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

"Easily summarized in the season article" – don't think so. Kristy in particular is a two-peaked storm, and Pacific Category 5 hurricanes tend to be long-lived and have substantial history of their own, or be short-lived with land impacts. Kristy is in the former category.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Kristy's met history can be easily summarized in the season section, we don't need to get into the intricacies of the storm's history and an article of such would be filler. JayTee⛈️ 05:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

An article that provides details a reader wants is not "filler". The existing summary leaves open several questions, such as its structural evolution before peak.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

We don't delve into the structural evolution of every single tropical cyclone in heavy detail nor do we need to, that caters to a very small proportion of readers. I stand by my point that Kristy's met history can easily be summarized with its season section. By your argument another fish storm like Hurricane Gilma, which underwent more structural evolutions than Kristy, deserves an article. JayTee⛈️ 16:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Adding on, we can ramble on about anything that a reader wants to learn about a subject for pages. This reasoning also kind of feels like saying that everything related to a celeberty is notable, which I believe there is a guideline against but I do not know what it is called. ✶Quxyz✶ 18:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

• Noting that the draft Kristy article has been published; a case of dueling draft reviewers. Drdpw (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Also, for the record, given the discussion here and on other talk pages, I do not see that there exists consensus that being a Category 5 Pacific hurricane alone establishes notability or qualifies a system for its own article automatically. Drdpw (talk) 23:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)