Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather/Non-tropical storms task force/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Requested article: wake low

One of these blew across northeast Mississippi, northern Alabama, and northern Georgia last weekend, and did a lot of damage — over 300 trees down just within the city of Atlanta alone, over a period of about two hours of non-stop high winds (!). I have yet to find a thorough and understandable explanation of this. Anyone up to the task?  –radiojon (talk) 15:25, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Once wind and westerlies get through GA review, I'll be happy to work on it, if no one gets to it beforehand. You think it should be named Wake low, or wake depression? I've heard it referred to as either of the two. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Google gives 3510 and 382 results respectively, so wake depression should redirect to the article at wake low. I may get it started myself, but my knowledge is limited, so I can only give it a basic outline. Your help would still be much appreciated.  –radiojon (talk) 23:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Initially, try to avoid making a list of such events, if you do create the wake low page. Instead, any list of wake low events should be to an article titled List of wake lows. An alternative would be to expand out heat burst, and rename it wake low, since it is a related phenomenon. That would require additional coordination. Thegreatdr (talk) 04:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the page is done. I had a devil of a time trying to find where this talk page was since I have so many in my watched pages. I've submitted it for GAN. Let me know if you notice anything missing. =) Thegreatdr (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009 "Gulf gale"

I have finally finished the first draft of the rainfall graphics for this system which moved into the Alabama coast in late May. They are located, unlinked, in the tropical cyclone rainfall directory at HPC. There was talk back then of starting an article on this system, which would be under the aegis of this project as it stands right now since it is still not officially recognized by NHC. Did anyone ever start it? Thegreatdr (talk) 09:21, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

2009 West Africa floods

Hi, I included the WP Non-tropical storms template in the 2009 West Africa floods talk page, but on hindsight I wonder whether the Sahel region actually meets the WP's criteria. If not, please let me know and I'll remove the WP template from the article's discussion page. Thanks! - Arjuno (talk 12:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Winter storms of 2009–10

I started this off, seeing as it was overdue. Keep an eye on it to make any additions as necessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

From WT:METEO

Thought I would do the person a favor and pass it on here. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 01:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

“ Hi, I have recently created a stub for the snowstorms in America entitled December 2009 North American snowstorms. Can some people expand the article to a reasonable standard? 03md 22:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC) ”

December 22- Storm

The "December 22-" probably needs its own article. Already killed 12 (probably more), occurring on a busy travel week, blizzard warnings across much of US, tornadoes in the south, flooding in chicago. This needs an article asap! -Marcusmax(speak) 23:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead User:Marcusmax. Anyone can write articles, you included. Leave Message, Yellow Evan homeMerry Christmas

I haven't been very active lately but eh, what the heck! I'll go for it! -Marcusmax(speak) 01:19, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Done buts needs more expansion. -Marcusmax(speak) 03:03, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Late February Noreaster

Currently there is a powerful storm (Noreaster?) over the mid atlantic and northeast, dropping lots of rain, snow and causing power outages in New york City, is this notable enough for a article? [1] - Source 1, - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind I found the article here: Third North American blizzard of 2010 - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Braer Storm of 1993 - GANing

A new article on the Braer Storm of January 1993 appears to satisfy top importance. Its central pressure dropped to 914 millibars (27.0 inHg), which is a record for the northern Atlantic, and possibly the entire Northern Hemisphere. It also caused blizzards across Scotland and winds over 100 knots from Scotland northward. Visit the talk page to weigh in. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't imagine what more is needed for this article, so I've gone ahead and GANed it. Let me know if you see any lingering issues/omissions. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Super storm

May I draw to the possibly-relevant WikiProjects the poor quality of the Super storm article? Hopefully someone with more relevant knowledge than myself can rewrite or improve it. M0ffx (talk) 11:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

See if the recent improvements were a step in the right direction. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Non-tropical storm articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Non-tropical storm articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Global storm articles listed for deletion

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global storm activity of late 2010. ~AH1^(TCU) 03:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

FAC

Just a heads up, the 1991 Perfect Storm, one of the more significant New England nor'easters, is on FAC right now - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1991 Perfect Storm/archive1. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:20, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HighBeam

Wikipedia:HighBeam describes a limited opportunity for Wikipedia editors to have access to HighBeam Research.
—Wavelength (talk) 18:21, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Improving the Columbus Day Storm of 1962

I have managed to locate several weblogs and other online sites containing useful information on this event. This should allow the improvement of referencing for this article. May need rewriting as some sections seem to have been cut'n pasted from the Storm King website.Graham1973 (talk) 14:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Since the 50th anniversary of this storm which so affected our state is coming up in a few weeks, we at Wikipedia:WikiProject Oregon have made this a collaboration of the week (or month). We'd love some assistance from the WP:NTROP group to see if we can get this article at least to Good Article status, if not Featured... --Esprqii (talk) 21:12, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Good luck with the project, there aren't that many ppl active here anymore. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 21:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Naming of Winter Storms

What is the WP community going to do about articles on winter storms now that at least The Weather Channel will be giving them public names? Are we going to follow the tropical cyclone route and plump them all into a "season"? Or assume each one is notable if it gets a name? What about naming of articles per storm if created? Thanks, gwickwire | Leave a message 22:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

This is definitely a question I wanted to ask also, 2012 Winter Storm Athena has already been created by another user and I am not sure at this point if it is even worth an article as it is predicted to be not as severe as it was originally forecast to be.--iGeMiNix 20:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Barring any nonconsensus, I think it should first of all be moved to just Winter Storm Athena. Secondly, I think we need to get a working version of 2012-13 United States winter storm season up now. Users will hear "Winter Storm Athena" and come here looking for information and not find it... I don't know how we should proceed, but we neet to get our act together on this pretty soon.. gwickwire | Leave a message 01:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

There is an AfD dealing with this issue here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012-13 U.S. winter storm season. Inks.LWC (talk) 20:53, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2013 North Pacific Super Storm

The article 2013 North Pacific Super Storm has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This fails WP:GNG. Other than a couple meteorology blogs, I'm not finding anything in the news. There's no indication that it caused any damage, injuries, or deaths. If anybody in the project disagrees or can find some sources, feel free to take it down, but simply being a bomb cyclone doesn't make it notable.

While all 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. Inks.LWC (talk) 00:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

March 6-10, 1969 northwest Atlantic hurricane-force storm; "new" image in commons

I uploaded a surface weather analysis related to this system, which lies to the right. It looks like there were 80 knot sustained winds from ship reports with the system...which is about as high as you can get for extratropical cyclones. It wouldn't surprise me if it had winter weather impacts in North Carolina and Virginia, judging from its track. FYI. Thegreatdr (talk) 01:16, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

WxBot

I've created WxBot, a bot which runs through AWB, to perform tasks for meteorology-relate projects. So far it has been approved for link and template replacement, but if we need it to do anything else in the future, I can make a request for additional approved tasks. I have placed a subsection giving a brief overview of the bot on the Project page under the Participants section. If anyone feels as if there's a better place for the subsection, feel free to move it. Inks.LWC (talk) 22:25, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Snow in Florida

I have nominated Snow in Florida to go up on the main page here. Any help you can provide in addressing the concerns that have been raised there would be greatly appreciated. Some of the concerns, such as replacing the deadlinks, are things that I do not know how to resolve, so I thought that bringing the nomination to the attention of people interested in non-tropical-storm-related articles might grab the attention of editors who know how to resolve these concerns better than I. Neelix (talk) 00:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Discussion on Alternate Names for Hurricane Sandy at Talk:Hurricane Sandy

There is currently a discussion going on at Talk:Hurricane Sandy about the placement of alternate names for Hurricane Sandy in the article's lead. Since the article concerns this project, I figured I would post this here to inform everyone. All views on the issue are welcome, and I would encourage those interested to participate in the discussion. Inks.LWC (talk) 00:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

This discussion was recently closed by me, but has since reopened. Please feel free to participate if you are interested. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 17:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013 Great Plains blizzard

I have just created October 2013 Great Plains blizzard for the ongoing system across the northern Plains. It's likely to go down as one of the biggest blizzards in South Dakota history. I'm going to need a lot of help constructing it though...so help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 03:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of October 2013 Great Plains blizzard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article October 2013 Great Plains blizzard 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/October 2013 Great Plains blizzard 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. Inks.LWC (talk) 08:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Winter Storm Index/Summary Articles

I have posted a discussion that is relevant to this WikiProject at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology#Winter Storm Index/Summary Articles. Please use the link and give your ideas there if possible! Dustin talk 22:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Mataafa storm -- November 24 1905? November 28 1905? Both?

These is confusion regarding this system, partially caused by the Great Lakes Storms article. It associates two extratropical cyclones to this "storm" -- one around the 24th and the other the 28th of November 1905. I was starting to improve the article before I realized the problem. Any feedback is appreciated. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:56, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Great Storm of 1833

On 31 August & 1 September 1833, a great storm affected the United Kingdom, northern France, Belgium and the Netherlands. For some idea of the scale, see List of shipwrecks in 1833. Obviously the Great Storm of 1833 article is going to rely heavily on contemporary newspaper reports, but these are available online through the British Library, although by subscription or accessible via a UK library website. Anyone up to writing an article? Mjroots (talk) 19:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I myself sometimes contribute to articles, if one is created. Could you provide links? Dustin (talk) 19:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

@Dustin V. S.: Sorry, but there's no point in me providing a link unless you have a library card issued by Kent County Council. You might have some luck if you search Australian newspapers via the link on WP:SHIPS/R, but you'll need to search from early 1834 onwards as it took a good five months or more before the Australian papers printed extracts from UK papers -1833 was not the age of 24hr news! If you are in UK and haven't got a library card, get one. Gives access to a wide range of research material. Mjroots (talk) 18:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I believe that on Wikipedia, there are also pages where you can request certain information from a wide variety of sources. Dustin (talk) 18:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

It would certainly be awkward for one of us to write the article if we don't have access to the sources. You'd have to provide copies to the editor who writes it. Any chances you could start writing the article, and if any of us see formatting issues, etcetera, we just go ahead and fix them? Being bold may be the only way for this article to come about. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:40, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Winter Storm Damon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Winter Storm Damon 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/Winter Storm Damon 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. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:16, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

My second attempt at a catch-all winter article: Draft:2014–15 North American winter

Attempt number 1: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology/Archive 10#Winter Storm Index/Summary Articles

I've spent a good chunk of my time over the past two days drafting an article dedicated to the North American winter. My first attempt was back in March, if I recall correctly, and the article was 2013–14 North American winter storms. A significant problem was that the article as I wrote it was never in good shape and there were too few contributors. I attribute much of the lack of contributors to the fact that winter was pretty much over by then, and not as many people want to write about past events. Then I had this thought: Why not start an article beforehand? That way, it wouldn't be too hard for me to draft the article up until this point in the winter, and I can potentially get additional contributors thanks to the recentism involved. That allows for the potential for much beefier articles to be created by the editors. I have partly modeled this article after the style used in Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones for hurricane/typhoon/cyclone seasons. I'd like to know what all of you think. Once I publish it (I will do so any time now), I plan to create all sorts of links to draw attention to it so editors will know it is there, and I hope for this attempt (unlike my last attempt at such an article) to be successful. Any thoughts for improvements are welcomed so long as you are still nice about it! Dustin (talk) 01:33, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

As they contributed to the original discussion, I have decided to notify the following users of this discussion:

• Hurricanehink (mobile), Inks.LWC, Knowledgekid87, LightandDark2000

By the way, I forgot to add, even up to the present, I don't think the article is fully completed; I was also planning on adding a few additional sections later. To preserve decent formatting, I was considering maybe adding a subsection of the "Events" section, with the title "Other events" which would allow for maybe a few paragraphs dedicated to the combination of all the minor storms that still had local impacts. I don't know how well that would work out, but in any case, I think it would work. Dustin (talk) 15:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

IMO, catch all winter articles just don't work. Notable storms have their own articles, as usual, but the other events scream of WP:News. If they're not significant enough for their own article, why jumble them together in one giant mess of an article? Furthermore, what is the criteria to even include a story there? There is no limit to what sort of info can be put in, which is why I am against having an article like this in the first place. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 16:28, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

There would definitely be limits to what could be included; I don't want a low-quality article. And I do not consider this draft to be a mess. In fact, I was so against this turning into a mess that a spent the better part of two days writing it in a linear fashion so that I wouldn't ever have to worry about having empty sections. I am sorry to see that you dislike the article, but really, people could argue that that a winter storm with minor impacts is every bit as deserving as some tropical storm with no impacts of having a section so long as there is enough information available to provide body to a section. Currently, there is not a great amount of meteorological information available in the individual event sections, but that is because the Weather Prediction Center has not released reviews on the storms yet. My first attempt did not work out because of the way I went about it, but this is nowhere close to being the same. Dustin (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't know if you are just judging this in this manner because I included "catch-all" in the title, but it isn't really catch-all. If that were so, there would be several headers that were almost completely empty and with storms which hit Nunavut only, or something of that sort. I intend for this article to be a place to centralize information about this winter, and it can also serve as a place with brief summaries and links to the other events of the winter that have articles, and a place of holding information about events that were special in some way or another but which failed to receive enough coverage to warrant an article. Dustin (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe that with enough time and effort, any article like this one can be made to work. It may not be ready just yet, but that situation is probably only situational. I must admit, I do miss the times when we had organized articles covering the major winter storms/winter events for entire winter seasons. The title doesn't have to be perfect at the moment; it is a draft, and I think that some more input into the article could really yield some wonderful results. Just give it some time. This draft is actually a lot more organized than many starter articles that I've seen, and that should be a sign that this actually can work. So instead of just scraping it, I believe that work on the draft should continue until its publication and the end of the winter season; it's time that we start to move articles along rather then kill them off due to not being "notable enough." LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

BY the way, may I recommend the title 2014–15 North American winter storms, as patterned after the first such article? LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

But the problem is without any focus (which you admit to), the article can never be done. It's just an AFD waiting to happen (again, as the events without articles are clearly just rehashes of news reports without longstanding notability). Even "winter storms" has the problem of a cold wave, severe freeze, or even nor'easters. What would be the beginning and end of this article? Is it just blizzards? Or does it only include storms that produce snow? A blizzard is something specific, and so is a nor'easter. But there can be nor'easters without snow, and snow events without a low pressure area? What about avalanches? Why worry in general about a season article, essentially, when the winter storm articles in general are in mediocre shape? this is why I am so opposed to this sort of article. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 03:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I already explained to you the point for which I have brought up this discussion. A large part of this is what should I include?. I don't understand why you think I want to throw in pointless information, although I could argue that a lot of people might say the same about completely non-notable tropical cyclones which still get sections in the season article (and killer tornado outbreaks which are not covered enough to write articles but which get their own sections in the "Tornadoes of YYYY" article). I have poured several hours into making this a good start, and we already went through this process last year, and the idea is to not delete, but actually attempt. I failed last time simply because I started the article after the winter was already over and much of the interest was lost. That isn't the case this time, and I wish you would give this some degree of consideration rather than outright and hard rejecting it and presenting no compromise. Think of all the storms which were significant in one way or another but which never had enough information to write an entire article about. Well, that is a huge part of the reason I decided to do this kind of thing in the first place. I will not accept the idea of just ignoring them completely, as that is a terrible idea in my opinion. At the very least, what ever happened to the idea of limiting it to WPC events and events with articles? Please just really think about what I am saying. Wikipedia does no justice in ignoring an event of significance just because it failed to receive enough coverage to write an entire article about. The only other way would be to generate a stubs for every event of the sort I have mentioned, which would look terrible. Dustin (talk) 06:10, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

And I do not consider this to be mediocre. "Global storm activity of YYYY" articles were mediocre, but my draft most certainly is not that bad. I consider this to be more criticism than is necessary, and it doesn't help the idea in any way. You claim that there is not a criteria of inclusion. Well, why not come up with one here? I am not giving up now, and there is too much potential to trash this idea as you suggest. Dustin (talk) 06:19, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Hink's comments pretty much sums up my concerns. Whereas with tropical cyclones, you have defined levels of intensity, winter cyclones are a whole different ball game. Plus, with The Weather Channel hyping up every storm, a lot of storms are seen as "notable" in the present, but aren't really notable after the fact. Someone who wants to start such an article first needs to set the limits for what the article will cover, and that's really difficult to do on this site. In an ideal situation, such an article could be created, but until parameters are set that would keep out mentions of a cyclone that impacted only the Yukon Territory, for example, I'm opposed. The reason that tropical cyclone season articles work is that (1) it's a defined season with defined boundaries; (2) the intensities of storms are defined (so minor systems that don't rise to the level of tropical depressions are automatically excluded); and (3) the season as a whole is notable, because there are predictions about how many storms, hurricanes, major hurricanes, etc. will occur, and you don't have this with winter extratropical cyclones. Inks.LWC (talk) 06:43, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Storms that impact Yukon and Nunavut don't tend to receive any coverage anyway, so of course they wouldn't get sections.z Also, the winter does receive predictions by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, although the specific details being predicted are different (temperature/precipitation versus storm number/intensity). In any case, how about this for a start. Additional changes can be made if necessary. These are eligible for sections:

• Storms with WPC Event Reviews
• Storms with articles
• High-quality but low-quantity stubs on subjects (most likely with severe local impacts, so not enough coverage for an decent-sized article) could be integrated

These aren't set down, but I at the very least do not intend to change the first two by much. The Storm Summaries are not as important or helpful, but they could be used as sources for certain details. I intend to say more, but it will have to wait for just a bit. Dustin (talk) 15:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Look, I know that some of you have dissenting opinions, but I think this deserves but one chance for future additions. Another thing I never noted is that whenever a new storm subject has arisen but is still a work in progress, it could initially be centered on the primary winter article, similar to tornado outbreaks and the "Tornadoes in YYYY" pages and tropical cyclone seasons and their sections. If we can decide what deserves an article, we can surely decide what deserves a section. If you never truly try, how can you be sure? All significant efforts must start somewhere. And if you don't want to contribute or are not a winter editor (Hurricanehink), you have no obligation to edit the page anyway. If the page is deemed to be too bad, messy, etc. and it is beyond repair, then an RfD can be initiated. This is an idea which has potential, but you cannot make use of that potential if you do not try. I will try this article this one time, and if it works out, we can continue. There is no need for further discussion at the moment. Dustin (talk) 19:25, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Winter storms essay created

I have just created an essay on what I believe reflects the consensus of the naming of winter storms by The Weather Channel please have it a look over thanks! - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Winter article 2015–16

For anyone interested, there are discussions at User talk:Dustin V. S.#2015–16 North American winter and User talk:KentuckyKevin#2015–16 North American winter which may be worth reading. If you have any comments, please leave them here or on KentuckyKevin's talk page. Thank you. Dustin (talk) 19:24, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

It looks like the discussion has settled at my talk page, so that's probably the best place to comment for now. I may consider moving it here in the future, though. Dustin (talk) 22:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

2015–16 UK and Ireland windstorm season

Just thought I'd let everyone know that there is an article for the UK/Ireland windstorm season. I'm not exactly sure when it is set to end, since windstorms can occur even in summer, but most of the sources state for the winter. This is the first time such an article has been made and is probably because this is the first year an official storm-naming system has been used in UK/Ireland. Hopefully 2015 Atlantic hurricane season could be a useful example for how such article can be written. Jolly Ω Janner 23:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Infobox windstorm small/Draft

I am currently drafting a new infobox, {{Infobox windstorm small/Draft}}, for use in 2015–16 UK and Ireland windstorm season similar to that of hurricane season articles. It is much smaller than {{Infobox storm}}, so will fit well into the article multiple times. If we have any other articles with lists of summaries of non-tropical storms, that could be used well there too. An example of it being used is shown at User:Jolly Janner/sandbox. Please feel free to recommend any improvements and edit either articles. The colour scheme is currently based on the maximum warning level issued by either the Met Office or Met Eirann, so this may not work well for storms outside the British Isles. Jolly Ω Janner[User talk:Jolly Janner|Janner]] 17:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Johnstown Flood listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Johnstown Flood to be moved to ???. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

North American winters

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology#North American winters for a discussion about the incorporation of Canada-related information into North American winter articles. Dustin (talk) 00:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

GA reassessment for Snow

Snow, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual 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. User:HopsonRoad 13:52, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Hurricane Ophelia (2017) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Hurricane Ophelia (2017) to be moved to Hurricane Ophelia. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 16:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Total fatalities or Total casualties????

As I noted over at Template talk:Infobox storm, the storm/tornadoes infoboxes seem to have half of them noting "total fatalities" for counting deaths and injuries, while the other half notes "total casualties" for the same thing. So I was wondering if we should try to conform all of the storm infoboxes to one of them, and exactly which one should we use if we do?--Halls4521 (talk) 01:37, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Costliest storms on Record succession boxes

I will like to put succession template boxes for both the succession of the "Costliest Atlantic hurricanes on Record" and the "Costliest U.S. tornadoes on Record". :Let me know if this is OK. Here's a couple of examples (one each); Thank You:

--Halls4521 (talk) 02:21, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I mean, after just glancing at the above boxes, I can't think of anything problematic. You might consider adding the years, at least for the tornadoes, though. Master of Time (talk) 22:44, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

You mean as in how long the tornado (or hurricane) held that record, instead of the date the event happened, right? I could do that. Thanks. --Halls4521 (talk) 21:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

No, I do mean the date, e.g. Topeka, Ks. (1966). Master of Time (talk) 06:36, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I can do that too. I'll start on in a few days. Thanks.--Halls4521 (talk) 05:59, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Winter Storm Emma (2018) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Winter Storm Emma (2018) to be moved to Storm Emma (2018). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 10:17, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

March 1–3, 2018 nor'easter listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for March 1–3, 2018 nor'easter to be moved to March 1–3, 2018, nor'easter. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 03:46, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Winter storm naming in the United Kingdom and Ireland listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Winter storm naming in the United Kingdom and Ireland to be moved to Winter storm naming in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Ireland. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 11:48, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Wind speed units for European storms

I have some problems with the wind speed for European storms. Since there is an important English-speaking country (the UK) which does not officially uses SI units (it uses mph and knots, in this case), UK users set infobox storm with mph whereas the infobox itself specify to use km/h (and then converts it into mph and knots). The present situation is quite messy. My proposal is to use km/h (or even m/s) for European storms but mph (or knots) when a storm mainly affects the United Kingdom (and possibly Ireland).What do you think about?--Carnby (talk) 18:26, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposal.

Please see and comment on this merger Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Meteorology#Proposal that impacts this project.Jason Rees (talk) 16:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

FAR for Extratropical cyclone

I have nominated Extratropical cyclone for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 22:53, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

New Draft started

Just a heads up to editors that I started Draft:Tornado outbreak of March 25, 2021. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Another New Draft

I started Draft:Cyclolysis. Gummycow ^moo_milk 16:37, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Subheader in Template:Infobox storm

I started a discussion about a possible change to the subheader on {{Infobox storm}}. Please participate in the following discussion if possible: Template talk:Infobox storm#RSI value. Thank you. – 🌀HurricaneCovid🌀 _(contribs) 15:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Upcoming merger of WPNTS and other meteorology WikiProjects into WikiProject Weather

Please see the following discussion about all meteorology WikiProjects that will affect WPNTS in the coming months: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones#Upcoming merger of WPTC and other meteorology WikiProjects into WikiProject Weather. Thanks, – 🌀HurricaneCovid🌀 _(contribs) 17:48, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Queston

Do you have a user box? I am also a member of of the Tropical Cyclones project so I was wondering.

Thanks! LuigiIsSuppreme989🌀 (talk) 18:00, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@LuigiIsSuppreme989:,

This user participates in the
Non-tropical storms task force.

is the barnstar for this project. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 18:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank You! LuigiIsSuppreme989🌀 (talk) 18:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Naming of extratropical cyclones worldwide

Currently, a discussion is occurring over naming conventions with using official/unofficical names for extratropical cyclone articles. Please participate in the discussion if possible. Thank you. ~ 🌀HurricaneCovid🌀 16:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Category:Non-tropical storms articles needing expert attention has been nominated for discussion

Category:Non-tropical storms articles needing expert attention has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Peaceray (talk) 21:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)