Thoughts on a re-evaluation of importance scale[edit]

The only season that seems comparable with regard to hyperactivity and confirmed damage is 2005, a top importance article. There is no doubt that this season is worthy of at least a High Importance rating in the WikiProject, but should the 2017 season article join the list of currently 24 top-importance articles in the tropical cyclone WikiProject and become the second season article rated as top importance? This season produced two top-importance storms (Harvey & Maria). While 2005 still holds the record of most active, I personally believe that the 2017 season warrants the status. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 00:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please maintain some global prospective. This would be the ninth Atlantic related article to be given top importance, and third in 2017 alone. With that in mind, it's not exactly a bad idea either. Ideally, I'd prefer to add a typhoon article or two but since there are so many typhoons, they all kinda blend in, and it's harder to justify one getting the top rating. Maybe swap 2017 AHS with another Atlantic hurricane? YE Pacific Hurricane 01:20, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your apparent mindset that high-importance ratings should be distributed equally. Some seasons will naturally be more noteworthy than others. If 2017, the most damaging system, had to have the same number of high-importance articles as…say…1986 Atlantic hurricane season, we'd either end up with $50,000,000,000+ storms not having high importance or high importance also assigned to fish storms. Also, basin equality doesn't necessarily hold true either. The Southern Atlantic has only ever produced one hurricane since tracking of those storms began. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 16:45, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
High-importance ratings shouldn't and aren't distributed equally. Generally speaking, most season articles are given mid importance, excluding pre-satelite era seasons, and only a select few are given high. I don't think you understand what I mean about basin equality. The NIO and WPAC have the deadliest and most severe land impacting tropical cyclones on Earth, so I'm hesitant about them being underrepresented. YE Pacific Hurricane 20:44, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Yellow Evan: However, North Atlantic hurricanes tend to be the most damaging. Harvey is currently the most damaging tropical cyclone worldwide. Before Harvey, it was Katrina. Without either, it would probably be Maria. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 21:14, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
True but in terms of human impact, deaths outweigh damage. YE Pacific Hurricane 23:42, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't make damage non-notable. There's no rule that only one metric of human impact can be emphasized, and while NIO and WPAC are practically competing with each other for being the deadlist, the North Atlantic basin seems to have a relatively secure monopoly on highest costs. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 00:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, agreed. Getting back towards the subject, I'm fine with 2017 AHS being added if another ATL article gets cut (Mitch, Andrew, and Maria come to mind). YE Pacific Hurricane 01:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go with Andrew. Mitch is still the deadlist in modern times, and Maria is the third-costliest, five spots above Andrew. Also, Andrew is the least recent. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 04:31, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with 2017 AHS being top-importance. It didn't have the activity of 2005 AHS, and of the three big storms (H, I, M), only Irma isn't top-importance, and it shouldn't be. I dropped Andrew, since Harvey and Maria topped it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Harvey, Irma, and Maria were all damaging and strong storms of importance, but its not as hyperactive as the 2005 season for sure. HurricaneCalebN (talk) 19:20, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 2017 left an even greater impact than seasons like 2004, 2005, and 2012. I think that this would deserve the top-importance rating by all means. If we were to take an article off of the top-importance level and replace it with this one, I would suggest it to be Harvey's meteorological history article. While Harvey was the costliest tropical cyclone on record, its meteorological history article doesnt really have any need to be top-importance. I would suggest making that high-importance while making this season article top-importance. What do you think? @Jason Rees:, @Jasper Deng:, @Cyclonebiskit:?Cooper 15:05, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Harvey's MH defenitley should not be top importance in my opinon and im tempted to downgrade it now - Not sure if 2017 AHS qualifies for top importance with only 2 really significant storms.Jason Rees (talk) 22:30, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd honestly say that all four retired names were very significant. Also considering the amount of media coverage and attention the season got, I think it could be top-importance. Cooper 14:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given that Harvey and Maria are already top, I don't agree. Hink and I have agreed about six years ago to generally keep top importance to a 1% quota as a way of maintaining due weight between the classes. YE Pacific Hurricane 15:39, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'd say 2017 deserves top importance as it was costlier than 2005, could be deadlier with the higheat estimate calling for over 8000 deaths, has three storms over $50 billion, and four retired names. This should mean a top importance article as seasons like these are very rare. To adress everything, Jason Rees I think that Irma was very significant as it claimed more lives than Harvey; 134 to 92 and caused a similar amount of damage as Maria 64 billion to 91 billion. Yellow Evan, there's a reason why there are 9 Atlantic top impotance articles there's plenty of warm water and minimal land and then there's a ton of land, the U.S., Mexico, the Carribean, Bermuda, the Azores, Cabo Verde, and the Canary Islands. About your 1% quota I still believe that the season article is still worth top importance as this kind of season is extremely rare, how many are notable enough to have one top importance article? Two? Now look at the season thoroughly, it was deadly, costly, numerous tropical cyclones, numerous records tied or broken such as most consecutive hurricanes tying 1893's record of 10, and four retired names, this kind of season is extraordinarily rare, and hence why it deserves three top importance articles. My reason on why the season itself and not just the big three should get top importance is that other storms; like Nate and Ophelia were costly and deadly except overshadowed by H.I.M.and there were numerous systems, the fifth most, and other little things the build up makes me believe that the 2017 season article should be top importance. Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Cyclone of Foxes (but not that Ophelia should be top importance despite being a very unusual storm and the worst storm to hit Ireland in half a century). It's been half a year since I started this thread and I maintain that 2017 is a fine candidate for top importance. It's very easily the only season that can compare to 2005. It surpassed 05 to become the most destructive season, it may have been deadlier than 2005, it was one major away from matching 05's seven major hurricanes, it produced four retired storms: Harvey which matched Katrina's damage, Irma which was deadlier than Harvey (don't forget that Irma obliterated Barbuda; I strongly disagree with the statement that there were "only two notable storms") Maria is worst disaster in Puerto Rican history, and let's not forget that Nate was the worst natural disaster in Costa Rican history. 2017 is the only season to produce three storms with over 40 ACE unlike any one storm from 05, and 2017 produced three of the top 10 most destructive storms by cost. It is fair and accurate to say that 2005 was more hyperactive as 2017 didn't enter the Greek alphabet, but most of the 05 storms had little to no impact and the real effects of the two seasons are comparable. 2017 was objectively more destructive, but perhaps deadlier as well. 2017 was the only season that can compare to 2005. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 23:34, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given that Harvey and Maria are top importance, and that's where the bulk of the deaths and damage lie (and to be honest, a case could be made for most seasons that death and destruction are tied to a few storms making it misleading sometimes to compare seasons - 2005 is somewhat more of an exception), I stand by my beliefs from months back. The logic "it was more destructive than 2005" doesn't really fly well since I don't think people understand why 2005 is there. 2005., the only top importance season in any of the seven basins, was more than just Katrina and Rita, though it also had more notable storms it's hard to compare 2005 AHS to really any other season, at least in the NHEM, in terms of shear records it broke. To believe that 2017 is the season that is closest to 2005 honestly screams recenism bias; 1933, 1995, and 2004 had reasonably high similar levels of activity to 2017, with similar records broken. As for the point over Atlantic having around 9 top importance articles, I'd like to point out that the Atlantic is not the only basin with tropical cyclone activity. The Western Pacific is basically the hotbed of tropical cyclones and yet the Atlantic has more top importance articles than the West Pacific (now to be fair, a case could be made that the Atlantic is more likely to appeal to English readers and in the WPAC, the most destructive storms are less clear since seasons tend to be somewhat more balanced in their destruction). YE Pacific Hurricane 20:12, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rapid Intenseification[edit]

Why does it just happen in some storms? Harvey Irma Jose Maria (Acyclonxe) Acyclonxe (talk) 11:57, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It takes a combination of environmental conditions to support an intense hurricane. If conditions are favorable and a storm enters the region, it might rapidly intensify depending on where the storm is in its stage of development. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2017 Atlantic hurricane season/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hurricane Noah (talk · contribs) 03:21, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Will do NoahTalk 03:21, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review

  • I won't make you hassle with it, but there is probably a way of fixing it. NoahTalk 02:48, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uh oh. Cindy's article says three. I've updated the numbers to reflect that Cindy caused three deaths. There was one death in Alabama when a boy was struck by a log pushed by a wave, one in Texas due to drowning, and another in Tennessee after a car skidded off a road and crashed into a pole--12george1 (talk) 05:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is now another issue in the same spot (a missing character or two I assume). NoahTalk 00:25, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was looking at it on the editing mode and it took me like ten minutes to realize what you were talking about--12george1 (talk) 02:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I reworded the sentence a bit and substituted "moderate tropical storm" with the landfall wind speed--12george1 (talk) 05:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Location and timing are vague... better to mention an exact time and location for the TD. Also, these can be combined. NoahTalk 00:25, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the years past, I've sometimes been lectured about being too specific. But I will fix this--12george1 (talk) 02:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's a city name, but I could've wrote the sentence better--12george1 (talk) 05:08, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm guessing you want me to link Windstorm Perryman to the windstorm season page. I did that, but oddly enough, the windstorm season page actually doesn't even mention Windstorm Perryman--12george1 (talk) 02:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think I am done now. Thanks for the review, @Hurricane Noah:!--12george1 (talk) 02:52, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article for Arlene?[edit]

Arlene was one of only two tropical cyclones in the Atlantic to form in April , On the other hand it didn't damage anything or cause any deaths, Anyway I was just wondering. 🌀HurricaneMichael2018 (talk) 00:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Considering this is already a good article, I don't see the point in dividing it further. YE Pacific Hurricane 00:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Maria strongest hurricane?[edit]

I tried to edit it but anyways it says Hurricane Maria was the strongest hurricane with a peak intensity of about 175 mph winds but Hurricane Irma had 180 mph winds. I am not sure if you guys are talking about in terms of pressure or winds because if you are talking about pressure then I get it with Irma and Maria because of 914 and 908. Anyways, I just wanted to know about that I like hurricanes (talk) 17:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strength of a hurricane is based off the lowest pressure read, not wind speed. So for this, Maria is considered the strongest storm. RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Thanks! I like hurricanes (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Categories