This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Can you take a look at the template I've been fiddling with and see if you can see why nothing is showing up. I've stripped it down so that it should just say "Test" where I want the scale to show up, and even that's not working. I have a feeling that I must have a wrong bracket somewhere, but I've gone over the damn thing at least 50 times and I can't find what I've done wrong. Here's the template: User:Inks.LWC/Template:Sandbox, and here's the test page: User:Inks.LWC/Sandbox7. Inks.LWC (talk) 18:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 2013 Pacific typhoon season may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I seem to get a better reception in WP than in certain other basins I could mention!--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 19:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't take kindly to you assuming that I'm just an idiot Yankee of all things (Learn the Mason-Dixon line). The changes that I was trying to implement were minor and did not even affect anything. I don't know why he refused to compromise. And this: "as he is young and doesn't 100% realize, that there is more than 1 way to skin a cat" makes no sense. What do you mean by young? What makes you think I don't realize something? (By the way, unless that was how you were taught, there shouldn't be a comma after realize; I'm not sure where you are from and I am really in no position to judge that anyway.) I don't want Edkins gone, but things can't stay the same way forever and change (even if minor) must come sometimes. United States Man (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Now, {convert/flip} also allows the options for "disp=table" or "disp=tablecen":
The format is about as condensed as possible for general options. That also allows option x3=~ to show a tilde with the original amount. -Wikid77 Wikid77 (talk) 09:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
That was your fault. I was scanning through and noticed that the season effects table had listed a dissipation date. I thought that since there was no current storms infobox, the infobox had been mistakenly left as currently active. There was no need to jump all over me. United States Man (talk) 21:27, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
On 14 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cyclone Tia, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Cyclone Tia destroyed over 90% of housing on the Solomon Islands of Tikopia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cyclone Tia. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
How do I request a page to be move-protected? I know a couple of articles that have enough problems for me to make such a request. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:47, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that we have been having a lot of trouble with IPs in the article. Could we ask an admin to semi-protect the page, so only auto-comfirmed users can edit it? I'm sure that will eliminate most of our problems on the article. LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Is the only article requiring improvement before 1990-91 SPAC is eligible for a GT.Jason Rees (talk) 14:11, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jason,
Thank you for offering to help get Snow in Florida ready for a main page slot. Its entry has been active since May. Do you see any remaining issues with the article?
Neelix (talk) 19:43, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Gopher removing reference 15 and added a pic from that reference. YE Pacific Hurricane 03:52, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
The situation in this basin is unique. This is the only basin (unless there is one in the S. Hemisphere) that two different agencies issue names. When CPHC storms cross into WPac, they are not renamed, so there should be no problem there. The parentheses show that PAGASA named it, and not the JMA. Otherwise, one would think the JMA named it. We need to be consistent so we don't confuse people, and this is the best way I know how at the moment.
On another subject, if you can expand Bising that would be great. But, I think it already has enough to have its own section. The "Other storms" section is beginning to get crowded. United States Man (talk) 17:30, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Everything seems to be in order. The part that it appears you have worked on has been properly written and sourced and times have been included. The SSHWS should probably be shortened to SSHS (a more common abbreviation). I think it is a good idea to keep the JTWC category changes on there, as many readers are probably more familiar with that scale than the JMA's. Overall, great job so far. United States Man (talk) 05:14, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Category:South Pacific Lists of tropical cyclones, which you created, has been nominated for merging to Category:Lists of tropical cyclones. 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. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:20, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Tropical Cyclones in Samoa to Category:Tropical cyclones in Samoa Hugo999 (talk) 01:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Tia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 06:12, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world.
Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations...
Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...
Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...
Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...
You shouldn't rely on just one site to source for 2013 Pacific typhoon season losses. Let me give you an example: Typhoon Wutip killed 65 people in Southeast Asia, nearly $523 million damage when made landfall in Vietnam, so you take damage only $3.28 million, according to me, this update is damage in China, which is narrow and only vision for a national bias affected by the storm. Or Typhoon Utor caused damage in the Philippines and caused $2 billion for PAGASA to rename storm "Labuyo", so that you give only $35.2 million. You should repair the damage properly. 123.27.147.102 (talk) 15:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't know that. If you know it, it's better to mention it in the article, especially provide a reference.--Quest for Truth (talk) 18:56, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Tia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cyclone Tia for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 17:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Shouldn't we note somewhere that JTWC stats are inaccurate? I don't think that we want people assuming that the storm is actually closer to the JTWC intensity, just because it is listed there. LightandDark2000 (talk) 02:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Nikkimaria (talk) 20:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Set me a difficult one, why don't you?
http://www.webcitation.org/6Ly5YUDyo
--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 23:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Cyclone Rewa know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 7, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 7, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Cyclone Rewa affected six countries and killed 22 people on its 28-day journey across the South Pacific Ocean in December 1993 and January 1994. It developed from a tropical disturbance on 28 December while situated south of Nauru. Crossing from the South Pacific basin into the Australian region, the system strengthened steadily as it paralleled the eastern Australian coast. Rewa initially peaked in intensity as a Category 4 tropical cyclone on 2 January, then weakened and returned to the South Pacific basin. Rewa re-entered the Australian basin on 10 January and reintensified to Category 5 severe tropical cyclone status by 17 January. Rewa transitioned into an extratropical cyclone on 20 January, with its remnants bringing heavy rain to New Zealand. Nine people in a banana dinghy en route to Rossel Island were presumed drowned after wreckage from their boat was found. In Queensland, three people were killed in traffic accidents caused by the storm, and another fatality occurred when a boy became trapped in a storm pipe. One death took place in New Caledonia, while flooding caused eight drownings in Papua New Guinea. Following the storm, the name Rewa was retired. (Full article...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jason Rees, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition will begin at midnight tonight (UTC). There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Hina you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TropicalAnalystwx13 -- TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 19:52, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
On 7 January 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cyclone Hina, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Severe Tropical Cyclone Hina, which formed in March 1997, was the worst tropical cyclone to affect Tonga since Cyclone Isaac in 1982? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cyclone Hina. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Sorry about that; that was meant for the timeline. Cloudchased (talk) 02:23, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
It's all right.
Still, I think that would be important the development of some kind of Aftermath and records section for Susan. ABC paulista (talk) 21:05, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Hina you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cyclone Hina for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TropicalAnalystwx13 -- TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 17:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I was wondering if you were ever going to finish the review for the aforementioned article? If not, I'm going to request another review. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
cyclones
Thank you for contributions to quality articles on cyclones and typhoons, such as Cyclone Keli and Typhoon Rusa, and for supplying timelies such as Timeline of the 2007–08 South Pacific cyclone season, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
A year ago, you were the 373rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for answering to my problem of ((Infobox hurricane)) last month. I found a solution to it and I think you may be interested to know more about it at Template talk:Infobox hurricane.--Quest for Truth (talk) 11:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Hina you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cyclone Hina for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TropicalAnalystwx13 -- TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 00:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:
Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.
Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Alan (1998) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cloudchased -- Cloudchased (talk) 00:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I won't undo the edit that you did, but please go onto www.americansamoa.gov, and let me know whether you get a Trojan virus or not. Thank you. Mitzi777 (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
I just went there, and my antivirus program read that the site had the JS/Agent.NKW Trojan Mitzi777 (talk) 19:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Alan (1998) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cyclone Alan (1998) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cloudchased -- Cloudchased (talk) 22:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Hey Jason. Thanks for reverting my edit in the article. In PAGASA's website, the name listed in the "2014" column is Katring, not Kanor. Jose replaced Juan due to the drastic effects of typhoon Juan but Katring was not. I don't know if the one who added Kanor was the disruptive editor. The source is correct, but Kanor isn't. So would you mind if I change Kanor back to Katring as per the sources? I want to avoid another edit war, so I'm consulting you first before I make the edit. Again, thanks! Japanese Rail Fan (talk) 06:15, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for help on Cyclone Bebe. meteorology is not my area. I am doing work on improving the Tuvalu pages and Cyclone Bebe is the major recent cyclone to impact on those islands so I thought it deserved its own page. (MozzazzoM (talk) 06:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC))
On 27 February 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cyclone Alan (1998), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that ten people died when Cyclone Alan struck French Polynesia in 1998, mostly as a result of landslides? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cyclone Alan (1998). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it may be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 21:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:
Other competitors of note include:
After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
News for February from your Wikipedia Library.
Donations drive: news on TWL's partnership efforts with publishers
Open Access: Feature from Ocaasi on the intersection of the library and the open access movement
American Library Association Midwinter Conference: TWL attended this year in Philadelphia
Royal Society Opens Access To Journals: The UK's venerable Royal Society will give the public (and Wikipedians) full access to two of their journal titles for two days on March 4th and 5th
Going Global: TWL starts work on pilot projects in other language Wikipedias
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:00, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Wasa–Arthur you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 05:41, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Wasa–Arthur you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cyclone Wasa–Arthur for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 20:21, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello, since you're Wikipedia's local expert on tropical cyclones, I decided to ask you this question. As we know, particularly destructive cyclone names are retired. However, a thought recently came into my mind: can retirements be appealed? For example, during the meetings of the relevant agencies to discuss retirements, is it possible for people attending to, for whatever reason, appeal a request for retirement for a name? And if tropical cyclone names are retired, does this mean that, if in the future, a totally new list of cyclone names is created for that basin, the retired name will not be considered for inclusion? Finally, have there ever been cases of tropical cyclone names that were retired, but eventually "reinstated"? Thanks. 125.212.121.211 (talk) 16:03, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
I got your message but I can't seem to make additions to WebCite at the moment. I will keep trying.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 11:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer Godot13 (submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist Adam Cuerden (submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. Cliftonian (submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.
With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi there- this is just a quick note to apologise for a small but important mistake in the last WikiCup newsletter; it is not 64 users who will progress to the next round, but 32. J Milburn (talk) 18:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Dominic was used again in 2009 --Andyman14 (talk) 12:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:54, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Cyclone Joy to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,307 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be).
You (and your talk-page stalkers) may also be interested to hear that there have been some changes at the TFA requests page recently. Nominators no longer need to calculate how many "points" an article has, the instructions have been simplified, and there's a new nomination system using templates based on those used for DYK suggestions. Please consider nominating another article, or commenting on an existing nomination, and leaving some feedback on your experience. If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk 13:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Sina you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dana boomer -- Dana boomer (talk) 20:10, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
[1] --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:15, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Sina you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cyclone Sina for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dana boomer -- Dana boomer (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's Adam Cuerden (submissions) was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's Godot13 (submissions), whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's ChrisGualtieri (submissions) who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included Cliftonian (submissions), who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and Caponer (submissions), who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from Reid,iain james (submissions), tiger from Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and The Lion King from Igordebraga (submissions). We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to Czar (submissions) and Red Phoenix (submissions) for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.
192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1990–91 South Pacific cyclone season you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 19:21, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
The article 1990–91 South Pacific cyclone season you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1990–91 South Pacific cyclone season for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees. I have thought that we should create the 2014 typhoon season timeline (or even 2015, 16, 17...) always on June 30. What do you think? If you agree, don't agree or change the creating date, go to my talk page. Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
OK, then. Bet just asking, we can create it right now? Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:33, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
So, you are saying we can create it when the next storm forms? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:27, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
…this article needing approval: [2] Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Good save at Typhoon Pongsona. I shouldn't edit when I'm tired. Thanks. Sprinkler21 (talk) 21:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)Sprinkler21
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
1994 Pacific typhoon season, 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.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 02:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jason, long time no talk! I saw that you reverted my edit to the SSHWS article; I removed Shary from the list of Category 1 examples because the list explicitly states that it is of storms that made landfall at Category 1 intensity; since Shary never made landfall, I removed it from the list. --Dylan620 (I'm all ears) 00:54, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, again. I found a site that there was economic damages from Hagibis. Do you thin that you will be part of the seasonal effects on the 2014 Pacific typhoon season? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Books & Bytes recipients: The Wikipedia Library has been expanding rapidly and we need some help! We currently have 10 signups for free account access open and several more in the works... In order to help with those signups, distribute access codes, and manage accounts we'll need 2-3 more Account Coordinators.
It takes about an hour to get up and running and then only takes a couple hours per week, flexible depending upon your schedule and routine. If you're interested in helping out, please drop a note in the next week at my talk page or shoot me an email at: jorlowitzgmail.com. Thanks and cheers, Jake Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I get it. "latest in the year", not "most recent". Still, that's very ambiguous wording, and should be clarified. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
I had no idea that was how we were supposed to do it. But thanks for helping out anyways. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:18, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for today's Cyclone Joy, precious again, but what a name for a cyclone! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:59, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's Godot13 (submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, Casliber (submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.
The round saw this year's first featured portal, with Sven Manguard (submissions) taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to 12george1 (submissions) and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from Figureskatingfan (submissions), a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from Cloudz679 (submissions) and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of Sven Manguard (submissions).
The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Did you not read my edit summary? It is of little use to have several ((CN)) templates stack right next to each other. They mess up the page's formatting as well, and they are absolutely terrible for the page aesthetics. One should be able to cover all. Dustin (talk) 19:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I've just noticed that some of the Australian region tropical cyclone season articles were redirects. I will fix them to point to the proper season. Then I'll check the South Pacific and South-West Indian Ocean to see if other redirects need fixing as well. I'll leave the ones that haven't been split for now. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Take a look at Template:Infobox_hurricane/testcases#Cyclone_Phalin. Your line break change might look OK on the one current storm article, but breaks the look for hundreds of historical storms. I'd suggest a revert, and perhaps test in the sandbox until it can look good on both. -- Netoholic @ 19:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello! You have received preliminary approval for access to Credo. Please fill out this short form so that your access can be processed. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Please join the discussion about the fate of this article.98.174.223.41 (talk) 20:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 7, June-July 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jason, I've found this source: http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cagayan-de-oro/local-news/2014/08/02/lpa-leaves-over-p5-m-damages-misor-357308 . It says about the damages from a LPA, which actually became Inday and then Nakri. An anonymous user doesn't agree with this, since he said that it is a different LPA, somehow. Do you think we should put it in the season effects in Nakri's section that it caused $116K in damages? Just saying that this section is the same in the talk page of the 2014 season. Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:05, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
2001 Atlantic hurricane season#Season impact (and wherever else this type of table is). -- Netoholic @ 20:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you please advise on if the colours in "Template:Storm colour" were ok, as the were presented before this edit? Id rather not see such a significant change to the colours if we don't have too. Thanks.Jason Rees (talk) 11:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I have done some investigation for TS Lingling and the first TD (91W) in 2014. NRL relocated 91W significantly and abandoned all positions until 12Z on January 13, but other agencies considered them as the same system. JMA analysed that the first TD degenerated into an LPA and developed back to a TD, but it was not significantly relocated at all. PAGASA and CWB also considered them as the same system. I have updated the track image, replacing the abandoned positions with JMA positions. Moreover, I am planning to write an article for Lingling, as the current description contains some mistakes. -- Meow 15:14, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
The final of the 2014 WikiCup begins in a few short minutes! Our eight finalists are listed below, along with their placement in Round 4:
We say goodbye to this year's semi-finalists. Matty.007 (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), WikiRedactor (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), Yellow Evan (submissions), Prism (submissions) and Cloudz679 (submissions) have all performed well to reach this stage of the competition, and we hope they will all be joining us again next year.
There are two upcoming competitions unrelated to the WikiCup which may be of interest to those who receive this newsletter. The Stub Contest will run through September, and revolves around expanding stub articles, especially high-importance or old stubs. In addition, a proposal has been made for a new competition, the GA Cup, which the organisers plan to run next year. This competition is based on the WikiCup and aims to reduce the good article review backlog.
There is now a thread for brainstorming on how next year's WikiCup competition should work. Please come along and share your thoughts- What works? What doesn't work? What needs changing? Signups for next year's competition will be open soon; we will be in touch. If, at this stage of the competition, you are keen to help the with the WikiCup, please do what you can to participate in review processes. Our finalists will find things much easier if the backlogs at good article candidates, featured article candidates, featured picture candidates and the rest are kept at a minimum. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Since you seem to be eager to fix all of them, I will let you finish the rest. I have no time for the edit conflicts, and you seem to know what you are doing. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 21:04, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, Jason. You haven't been editing in the 2014 PTS article for a while and I am the only one editing too much like admins. I was wondering that since I help and do the season timelines, I am testing the 2014 PTS one. I thought that the timeline is small so I added the "barset:break" after Neoguri and I thought it is right. Is it alright? I was saying this to you since the anonymous users don't agree with me and revert my edits. Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer Godot13 (submissions) has taken a strong lead with a featured list (historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion Cwmhiraeth (submissions) is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. Casliber (submissions), who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.
Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi, this is Rishabh. I have created a discussion where your views will be greatly appreciated, regarding whether Land Depressions should be considered as "other storms" from now on. Pleae have a look at the discussion where I've explained everything. Located here. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 03:29, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Jason. I was wondering that what happened to the Timeline of the 2013 Pacific typhoon season? Do you know who put the good information in there? I thought that it was good information, but it is too much. Also there are a couple of sentences saying about from the CMA agency, which is not official. Also again, I thought there is too much PAGASA names. (Example(s): Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) has made landfall or Tropical Storm Yagi (Dante) has intensified...) Want to help fix this article? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:32, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 8, August-September2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
The file you asked for is here: 2014-08-19, 0000z--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 15:42, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Done, and thanks for moving the TWOs, my bad!--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 09:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Jason Rees, do you remember the other topic about this TL that it has to be in the SWio instead of the AusR season? This one though is different, but it is about the same TL. This anon. user is reverting my edits of what you told me to do. You told me to put an "other storms" section in the SWio season and mention about the TL in the AusR season, if I am right. Can you please also keep an eye on this guy, too? Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:20, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
I've seen your comment about your reversion in the Timeline of the 2014 Pacific typhoon season. Your comment says that "how many times I have to tell you...", although I am pretty sure that you didn't tell me 'how many times' (not being rude here). So if that's the case, then I will be doing some fix-ups in the timeline article and have thought to replace the LPA statements to a tropical disturbance statements. Is that OK now? Typhoon2013 (talk) 03:09, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. Casliber (submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.
A full list of our prize-winners follows:
Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk · contribs) The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:
Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team 23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
...provide evidence as to what way in which this is an actual usage which would ever be used in a formal setting, and also please provide support for why it should be used rather than a more understandable, frequent usage. Also, I never was arguing that "during" was not a proper word; I was saying that I cannot verify that it is a proper usage in that particular situation, and note the word "usage". Also, I must say that I disagree with you in that you think it sounds better; it sounds worse to me. I've neither seen nor heard "during 26 July", "during May 7", or "during August 27" or any other similar situations, regardless of date format (Day-Month vs. Month-Day). I've seen examples like "during the evening of 16 March" and "during the daylight hours of June 21", but nothing really beyond that. Dustin (talk) 00:59, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey, Jason. I just translated that section into the German WP and found, that you messed up some of the citations (it semes you copied them from last year but forgot to actualize all datum). Also there is still some SPac stuff in it which I think should be put away. Regards, --Matthiasb (talk) 19:25, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.
If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk), The ed17 (talk), Miyagawa (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:
Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--The Wikipedia Library Team.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I've added 3 TWOs as an entry for a Perth Low on Talk:2014–15 Australian region cyclone season/December. I will look into the other archiving issues you raised.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 20:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Jangmi officially dissipated at 00:00 UTC on January 2, so the official date of dissipation is January 2. As Wikipedia uses “dissipation” to describe when the system dissipated, it should be January 2 instead of January 1. This rule is also used to other storms. -- Meow 06:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.
Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 9, November-December 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
cyclones
Thank you for contributions to quality articles on cyclones and typhoons, such as Cyclone Keli and Typhoon Rusa, and for supplying timelies such as Timeline of the 2007–08 South Pacific cyclone season, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
A year ago, you were the 373rd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Cyclone Nigel at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 04:16, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
I know that but i wonder the ZODW weaker or stronger than TDis. Final-Fantasy-HH (talk) 19:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
We can easily say that those are retired because the PAGASA mentioned that those typhoons are decommisioned, thus all except Jose have brought significant impacts to the Philippines. PAGASA said that except for a very few storms, names that have caused at least 300 deaths or at least PHP 1 billion ($22.6 million 2015 USD) - and the names were changed, are therefore considered as retired.
Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't think this was a problem with the upload, it's a fault in Webcite's retrieval. It won't currently retrieve anything, even things which have been retrievable in the past. Even the examples on Webcite's homepage don't work.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 12:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Can the need warning names 90Q.INVEST in South Atlantic with SS Cari? 123.27.153.191 (talk) 04:35, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
On 23 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cyclone Nigel, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1985 the Fijian island of Viti Levu was hit by two tropical cyclones—Nigel and Eric—within 36 hours? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cyclone Nigel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees,
The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too.
You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.
More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.
Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I did some copyediting in the tropical cyclones section of the article – in the diff it might look like I only moved things around, but I did edit the text as well, so it would be great if you could check whether it's still factually correct. I hope I've made it a bit clearer and more readable. --filip (talk) 19:53, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Am I right, Jason? As of right now and making this message (0800Z 07/04), Maysak is still active according to JMA, right? It's because 3 people don't agree with me and they declared that it had dissipated. Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:11, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
The "Cyclone Fran" article is causing a Checkwiki high-priority error #5 "Comment tag with no correct end". The errant code is here:
As the system affected Vanautu
<!--
Given that you've been actively editing the article, would you mind handling this problem? Thanks. Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 20:27, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Not again. You did made lots of edits in the 2014 PTS season article but one of those edits I didn't agree with and it was the edit with 2 storms which were named by PAGASA and designated by JTWC (04W (Caloy) and 14W (Karding)). First of all, I didn't agree with this 2 years ago when you edited 30W (Wilma) on the 2013 PTS article, then you explained it to me. So I agreed and you told me to do this to every season with these types of scenarios. But Meow and 2 other people disagreed with me so I explained it and they explained it. It is confusing to us, actually. Also that's why in the 2013 PTS article, it still states 30W (Wilma), unless you leave a message to inform other users about this. :| Typhoon2013 (talk) 05:02, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi again. I don't know why but you've been changing lots of stuff and is it ok if I could fix the table in the 2014 PTS article in the names section? Should I do it in the other seasons as well? Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:09, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Two nights ago, I was just doing some extras and reading text of the Pacific typhoon seasons from 1990-99. The 1994's Katring made me investigate what caused the retirement of 2010's Katring. I compared the Katirng from 1987 and 1994 and found out that Teresa (1994) caused more damage and impacted the Philippines more, but Thelma (1987) did not really caused direct impact but did cause a storm surge which impacted the Philippines. So I thought that it was the 1994 one. Just my thoughts. Typhoon2013 (talk) 03:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was Cas Liber (submissions) in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus.
Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.
The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) 16:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 11, March-April 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jason,
This was last updated with 2008 data. Are you able to locate any recent data and update?
Regards. Moondyne (talk) 11:06, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi. For the article: List of retired Philippine typhoon names, you reverted my edit because I reverted this anon user about PAGASA strengths of typhoon and super typhoon. Well according to PAGASA, they added the STY strength just this year. Why don't we just put in the 2010's section that: in 2015, PAGASA added the STY category for people to not be confused? Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article History of tropical cyclone naming you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 22:42, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much for allowing me to view them. It looks like they have some information that is unavailable elsewhere, so I appreciate this. Dustin (talk) 18:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:
Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
The article History of tropical cyclone naming you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:History of tropical cyclone naming for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 15:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
How is this redundant to a decent summary? It seems like a useful addition in my opinion. Dustin (talk) 18:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 12, May-June 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)
The Interior 15:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
... Can you tell me ?... how many category 5 typhoon in South China Sea ? Final-Fantasy-HH (talk) 05:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing—Typhoon Nangka (2015) —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Typhoon2013 06:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I only ask because I'm not 100 percent familiar with the process. I know that the sandbox is for creating the article in ones own user space as their own version of the page, however how does one know when a page is of good enough quality (or whatever components are needed) for a page to be made? And does it take an administrator to undo the "redirect" component on the cyclone so that it doesn't keep redirecting to the main article when one tries to make the article? Undescribed (talk) 12:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
You make cyclone tracks right? So is a track map necessary to the article: South Atlantic tropical cyclone? I mean like a season summary track map like all other basins which includes all storm tracks? Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:14, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Why don't tropical cyclones regularly form in the South Atlantic and South-east Pacific ? What makes it different from the South-west Pacific and South Indian oceans in that regard? Thanks!Final-Fantasy-HH (talk) 13:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Fold3. This is a brief update, to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you,
Gamaliel (talk) 19:45, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Post–2009 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone seasons. Since you had some involvement with the Post–2009 Southern Hemisphere tropical cyclone seasons redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 18:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.
In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far Casliber (submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was Coemgenus (submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.
The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.
Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!
Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: I think we're pretty close to getting Raquel's article out. Just a bit more in the top and it'll be good to go. Izmik (talk) 06:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I was looking at the 1999-00 Australian region cyclone season for a non-wiki project but I figure I found something that requires addressing in the article. I found that the WMO tracks for Steve, Vaughan, and Tessi (in IBTRACS) were incomplete (seems to be an problem with Brisbane). I also found the very useful Wellington BT had... more complete tracks. The problem is, they match up very well in everything except wind speed (pressure matches just fine). Wellington does not have Steve ever reaching cat 3 intensity (and similar findings for the other two storms), and curiously enough, it doesn't appear BoM does either. this page, found from a source on the wiki article, as well as this map, the accompanying text, and their headers, do not appear to support the fact that Steve was ever a cat 3 severe tropical cyclone. So I'm not sure why IBTRACS hasn't been changed to reflect this but it seems Wellington is up to date on this. I'm not sure what should be done about it. Also, is there any online best track data from BoM?
Also, concerning the CPAC list on List of historic tropical cyclone names, it bothers me that the list doesn't align properly (or rather, that it's just one long list of names). Every other basin is effectively split into their lists, either alphabetically in NHC & SWIO, or because their seasons have many more storms than CPAC (WPAC, AUS, SPAC). I don't see why CPAC wouldn't be split into its lists either. It looks really weird and haphazard that it each name starting with, say, N, doesn't fit right next to the other three of them. The current format is basically one long concatenated list in table form, with years after each item, which doesn't make much sense. The width of the table is 10 columns as it is, 12 can't hurt?
-- atomic7732 22:28, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Alpha Monarch. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Tropical cyclone naming— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ♔ MONARCH Talk to me 18:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 13, August-September 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees.
In Main Page on Vietnamese Wikipedia, Typhoon Cecil (1985) is this week's featured article. Can you translate it to English (You can use the Google Translate on some difficult words)? I think it can be a good article on English Wikipedia. CVQT (talk) 06:29, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
I just found a similar system to Raquel, it is 17F from 2001-02 season. One of the reasons why Raquel is more of in the 2014-15 season, is that its designation is continued from that season. Because of this, should 17F (at the moment, it's part of the 2002-03 season according to its season article) be apart of the 2001-02 season? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Do we mention ACE calculations in each season articles summary and is it necessary? The source is from the JTWC trackfiles and JMA archives if you are wondering. If not, sure I'll rm the other similar sentences in other articles, but how about the ACE table in some EPac season articles? Typhoon2013 (talk) 03:38, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.
This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Cas Liber (submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.
Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to Rationalobserver (submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.
A full list of our award winners are:
We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
In this: http://www.bom.gov.au/cyclone/about/names.shtml , it says that there is no replacement for Oswald and these names (Rubina, Lam, Marcia and Isobel) needed a replacement. I am confused, so does that mean that those names are retired? The names are marked in red and says "Cyclone names marked for replacement". Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
HazelAB (talk) 13:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
You know how in storm infoboxes, it mentions the intensity at the top (Eg. Typhoon, Cat5 etc)? And also includes the agency in brackets? In the SPac and AusR basin articles, it doesn't say the agency but says "(Australian scale)". Should we add in the agencies? Because there is this thing saying WarningCenter and FMS and BoM. I'll give you an example in the 2015-16 SPac cyclone season article. Typhoon2013 (talk) 05:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I noticed there was a TD in both the 2011 and 2012 PTS articles. It says that the TD developed on 31/12 of 2011 and dissipated on 01/01 of 2012. However in the 2012 article, the same TD, which dissipated on that day, made the 2012 PTS start. So my question is, isn't the TD part of the 2011 season, not the 2012? Because it is a bit confusing because there was never a storm which dissipated on the next year which made the next season started. You know what I mean? So which means that the 2012 PTS started on January 13, not January 1 as the 2011 TD dissipated that day and part of the previous year.. Typhoon2013 (talk) 02:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 14, October-November 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs)
The Interior, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:12, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Joni you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.
After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine (User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason (User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew (User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.
We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.
The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.
If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Figureskatingfan (talk), and Godot13 (talk).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.
We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.
We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Esau you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
cyclones | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 373 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:28, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Esau you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Cyclone Esau for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricanehink -- Hurricanehink (talk) 18:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Well I saw the current bulletin from TCWC Brisbane about the current TL active today. It says a weak low instead of a tropical low, and this is the same for the weak low during Feb 5. I might be sure as well, when TCWC Perth started issuing bulletins of 07U, it formed on Jan 19 and states a weak low (it was mentioned a TL few days later when it was considered a moderate chance of developing). Also yeah, removing the low is ok, but as I said, let's wait and see as another TL might develop in the coming days. Depending on the designation of our next low, if it is 11U, then the Feb 5 low should only be mentioned in the Other systems section. If the next one is 11U, then totally rm the Feb 5 low and the current low should be recognized as 10U. However if it is different, then I'll think about it, I guess.
Sorry if I'm going too fast here, but the BoM has now started tracking on our recent low in the IO and was designated as 09U. It is impossible and never happened before when we have 10U, then he next one will be a number before 10. So pretty much that Feb 5 low is 09U? Or did they make a mistake?Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 15, December-January 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Jason. I'm just posting to let you know that List of off-season Atlantic hurricanes – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 18. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 00:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I decided to put another talk section your talk page because I knew this is going to be long and I will be breaking it down. But I got three things:
First, as of right now since few hours ago, Tatiana is just sitting at the border of both basins (160E). Therefore, I have decided to also put Tatiana in the SPac article as the FMS is also tracking it.
Second, for the formation of Tatiana, I put Feb 6 (I put sources and a summary in its section) because the precursor tropical low of Tatiana developed on the 6th, however as you said, that not to include weak lows that aren't tropical, I stated that the TL weakened to a LPA and re-intensified back to a TL on the 10th.
Third, which also confuses me, so you said that 09U developed on the 8th, right? I did see the sources. However it says that "a tropical low is forming", which means that the TL has not yet formed within the 2 advisories/dates (Feb8-9). But on the Feb 10 advisory, it states a "tropical low was located/formed..." With this, 09U formed on the 10th. Because a TL which is still forming means that it hasn't happened yet/describes the future.
As a general note the dates will be probably be sured up further next week once both systems have dissipated.Jason Rees (talk) 01:33, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.
Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by Cyclonebiskit (submissions), and two each by MPJ-DK (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), and Cas Liber (submissions). Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by Adam Cuerden (submissions) (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with J Milburn (submissions) completing nine.
If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that Cas Liber (submissions) claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email).--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello Jason Rees, I was wondering if you are still interested in my contributions to your sandbox pages on cyclones such as Raja, Namu, Fergus, and Raquel? I know it has been a while but just let me know! =) --Undescribed (talk) 14:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I've been seeing previews of what you did in the 2015 PTS article and want to make a new format. Are you thinking to remove the 'Retirement' section and place the retired name sentences in both the International and Philippine name sections? Any why don't you like to make the retired and replaced names to be in italics? I just want to know so I could do it to previous season articles as well. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I will start tomorrow! HurricaneGonzalo (talk) 17:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
So normally, the TSR issues forecasts in May, July and August, which the final report of the season is in January of the next year. Last year, TSR cancelled out doing the July forecasts, leaving it with 2 forecasts. Also TSR still has not (yet) issued their final report for the 2015 season, which I have been waiting for 3 months. I got a feeling that TSR is not going to publish forecasts soon with this, just like what they did for the Australian basin, which they discontinued forecasts since 2011. If this really happens, what do we do? Do we still add the season summary section with only unofficial agencies? Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:43, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, but I suggest you that in your futures article creations, reestruturations or reconstructions, you first make your changes inside your sandbox, to apply all of them in the article in one edit once they are finished. It's very confusing for someone who access those articles to see unfinished sentences and broken links or tools, and it happens often when you are making many major edits. So it's natural for someone to revert it to a more stable revision, which can cause a trouble for you and for the readers/editors. But, it's just a suggestion.
But, will you do the same for La Niña article? I think that that article is in a more dire situation than El Niño's one. ABC paulista (talk) 00:03, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Jason Rees, hope you are well. =) Anyways, I have been very busy lately but have been editing Tuni's sandbox page in my spare time. Several days ago I added all the information I could find about Tuni up until dissipation. Do you think that there is anything else that should be elaborated on in that section? --Undescribed (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Jason,
My explanation for the change I made in "Tropical cyclone" is as follows.
I noticed the difference in season of this region compared with the Australian and South Pacific region. One would expect the seasons to be more or less the same. So I checked reference nr. 41 esp. page I-5 "Cyclone season". From that I concluded that the period 1. July - 30. June is nothing more than an administrative period. This section also confirms that cyclones in the SW-Indian are most frequent in the southern summer.
I understand you are the specialist on this subject so it's up to you how to evaluate my remark. Best regards, Koos van den beukel (talk) 10:09, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The last sentence mentions an upper-level anticyclone. Is reference nr. 17 used and interpreted in the correct way? Koos van den beukel (talk) 17:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello Jason Rees, I was wondering why you undid a recent edit I made to Hurricane Marilyn in regards to it being the first M name to be retired. A similar statement was already made with Hurricane Luis and several others, so I figured that mentioning it for Marilyn would add congruity. --Undescribed (talk) 10:08, 2 May 2016 (UTc)
Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.
Round 2 saw three FAs (two by Cas Liber (submissions) and one by Montanabw (submissions)), four Featured Lists (with three by Calvin999 (submissions)), and 53 Good Articles (six by Worm That Turned (submissions) and five each by Hurricanehink (submissions), Cwmhiraeth (submissions), and MPJ-DK (submissions)). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by Adam Cuerden (submissions) and five by Godot13 (submissions)). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) scored 265 base points, while The C of E (submissions) and MPJ-DK (submissions) each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with MPJ-DK (submissions) completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, Cwmhiraeth (submissions) and Cas Liber (submissions), broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.
If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) -- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
--Undescribed (talk) 10:44, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jason. If you may not know, the first system of the 2016 Nio season had formed, and I have seen that Meow said that "we use DMY format in this basin". But in previous years, or I should say all, the articles are used in MDY format. I know that you don't really edit that much in these basins but, what do you think? Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:17, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Can you please give me some understanding to the reason behind the revert? It was a bad value, as the reference given shows. Additionally, it was a quiet change someone made in December 2015 that switched it from rapid intensification (used in most TC discussions and publications) to rapid deepening. I've been working on expanding the text for the section a bit to try to give a better idea why winds are used in TCs whereas pressure is used in ETCs and give it a tie to the explosive cyclogensis page... but if it's going to be reverted, perhaps I should just quit while I'm ahead instead of waste my time. But some kind of explanation would be most appreciated :-) Thanks JeopardyTempest (talk) 11:20, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
+++
Hello Jason Rees, I have been looking through the tutorial on how to generate maps of tropical cyclone tracks but having difficulty figuring it out. Do you need a specific coding device to use it? Also, is there a site that you can use to create hypothetical hurricane tracks for non-professional reasons? Thank you --Undescribed (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi! Would you like to join in the poll/consensus/contribution of the Season forecasts table in the Wikiproject talk page? I would appreciate it. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:37, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Could you give me a preview of what you are proposing? It should make it better for us to give opinions about your idea. ABC paulista (talk) 02:46, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I have seen your edit/revert summary of 01W. "we do not have any" of what? 1-minute winds? NRL Trackfile states 1-min winds of 20kts. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
That "source" is from a forum, isn't it? There's no way that pass WP:SOURCE, it doesn't even cite an BoM link. ABC paulista (talk) 02:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 17, April-May 2016
by The Interior, Ocaasi, UY Scuti, Sadads, and Nikkimaria
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
About a month ago, when 01W was active I was pretty much the only one updating anything about that system. According to the JMA's weather maps early on June 28, it declared the dissipation of 01W as it was absorbed by a front. The only problem as of now is that your said that you cannot find anything on the 28th, therefore it dissipated on the 27th. I just asked Keith to archive some sources to the recent 3 systems so I can add it in. Also I thought we use the RSMC for dates? Typhoon2013 (talk) 20:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
If you may not know, I always update the Portal:Tropical cyclones/Active tropical cyclones article. If a TD is only tracked by JMA (not JTWC and PAGASA), what do we call them? Do we just simply call it as "Tropical Depression" or do we call it like "JMA Tropical Depression 5"? Please reply because somehow United States Man doesn't agree with me (check the view history box if not sure). Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Template:JTWC Best Track Analysis has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:46, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tropical Storm Bavi (2015) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 22:02, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
The article Tropical Storm Bavi (2015) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tropical Storm Bavi (2015) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 12george1 -- 12george1 (talk) 02:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
The data feed at http://weather.noaa.gov appears to have been discontinued. Do you have any ideas on alternative sourcing? Best to reply on the discussion thread at Talk:2016_Pacific_typhoon_season#Houston_We_Have_A_Problem--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 23:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 18, June–July 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi, Samwalton9, UY Scuti, and Sadads
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Done.--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 09:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
For what reason don't we need a retirement section on Hurricane Bob? Angela Maureen (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
I wish you would write it more. 113.186.239.204 (talk) 07:15, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Remember when you sent me information about Typhoon Abe last year via LexisNexis? And the Mariners Weather Log? Do you still have access to these sources? Thank you. Dustin (talk) 21:44, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 19, September–October 2016
by Nikkimaria, Sadads and UY Scuti
19:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:
In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:
Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email)
Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time. The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
So in accordance to TCWC Brisbane's latest bulletin, it says that "a number of transient tropical lows have developed". What does it mean by that? In animations, I only see 1 possible TL, not a number. I'm just confused with this and I don't even know what to say about it. Should this be added to the season? Or do we just wait? Typhoon2013 (talk) 11:11, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I've linked them to 96W.INVEST on Talk:2016 Pacific typhoon season/June--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 17:24, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2017 Atlantic hurricane season. Since you had some involvement with the 2017 Atlantic hurricane season redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 22:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.
For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):
Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address.
After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.
The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email).
Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.
If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Jason. You know how I add in storm summaries in the 2016 PTS? Am I doing a great job? Because I think I have figured something out and I might change some things. So whenever I add in storm info in their sections, I noticed that there are a lot of sources I've used (reason why 2015 PTS has like 600 refs and 2016 PTS has 400). I think that information should be used for the storm article itself and therefore, I should reduce the info I put in and more of the effects info. I'll start doing that soon. You should know my goals, I like some of the PTS articles to have a GA rating. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:14, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
If for example there is a system where the JTWC has tracked it from December 3-4, though the JMA has only tracked it during December 3, which storm duration do we use? Is it just the #1 rule where we always follow RSMC? Merry Christmas, btw. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 07:09, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello Jason, long time no see, i have problem with a guy Typhoon2013. Hope you and your family have great night and Merry Chrismas. Truơng Huy Salvatore - Thảo luận 14:38, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
There is a discussion right now. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones#Using JMA weather maps to extend western Pacific storm tracks needs to stop. Typhoon2013 (talk) 23:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi and first of all Happy New Years. So of course, 2016 is over and is it right to remove the 2016 lists of the Atlantic and EPac sections in Tropical cyclone naming? Because that is what you did last year and I'm just confirming it to you just in case. Typhoon2013 (talk) 23:38, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 20, November-December 2016
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Template:US Inflation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Samsara (talk) 06:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Four years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Category:Moderate Tropical storms requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. 219.79.127.179 (talk) 05:34, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:
The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.
So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Jason. I'm just posting to let you know that Tropical cyclone naming – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 27. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 23:17, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi. For sure we keep talking about this (sorry if annoying), but there was a TD that developed east of PH during 20/3 and dissipated that same day. Though the system re-developed on 21/3. The JMA did not downgrade the system to a LPA but it just re-developed. So these are two separate systems right because we have no source that this is the same system? Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:55, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:
Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.
So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I just thought I'd notify you of this. Master of Time (talk) 04:58, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Is the 2011's Cyclone Fina, was it declared as a Cat1 (Aus) cyclone or just a TL? The database only declared it as a tropical low (with "no name" for some reason), but from this, or the TCR, states that Fina "managed to reach to a TC for a short period of time". So what? Typhoon2013 (talk) 08:40, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
After I fixed the page, why does everyone keep changing it back to its broken state? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.35.20.57 (talk) 19:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, Thanks for your edits to try and improve the way the dates were sorting on the List of deadliest Atlantic hurricanes. However, changing the format of the dates to 1870, October 5–14 or whatever doesnt help the sorting and goes against Wikipedia policies on the dates. Anyway the problem with the sorting was the middle code didnt always have the century on it, so for example it was sorting as ((Sort|701005|October 5–14, 1870)) which is why you saw Jeanne 04 before San Marcos 1870. However, it was quite an easy fix to make once I had RV'd your edit as the way it should sort is ((Sort|18701005|October 5–14, 1870)).Jason Rees (talk) 20:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi again, Jason. So @Jasper Deng: has been reverting me because I removed the "Storm names" section (the season had already ended) as you said a while ago. Are you still on to this, or do you want me to plan a similar situation to the PTS seasons where we put a table of the used names? Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:53, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Template:IMD small has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 15:08, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Please refer to the speedy renaming section Hugo999 (talk) 14:26, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: Hi Jason Rees. I hope you had a refreshing, rejuvenating and revitalising Wikibreak! I have a question, and as you are a long-time and experienced editor on Wikipedia, especially in the field of tropical cyclone articles, I thought I might ask you.
There is currently a low pressure system in the central Indian Ocean, located at about 10°S 87°E (on the eastern edge of RSMC La Réunion's area of responsibility). The Australian Bureau of Meteorology noted the system in a tropical cyclone outlook for the western region of the Australian region, referring to it as a tropical low, not just a low (meaning the system is of significant magnitude). The BOM assessed its minimum central pressure as 1005 hPa, but did not give an indication as to the system's windspeeds (though, by looking at the 00:00 UTC gradient level wind analysis for 2 June, 15-30 kn winds are present around the system, with 30-45 kn winds in the southeastern quadrant). Despite the BOM's assessment of the system, La Réunion has not as of yet (as far as I can see) made any mention of the low. I am wondering whether or not I should include the system on the 2016-17 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season article. If I did, I would classify it as a tropical disturbance, as I'm pretty sure the system meets the criteria for this classification.
Thanks in anticipation for your advice. ChocolateTrain (talk) 08:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 22, April-May 2017
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.
Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jason. I just want to discuss this here at the moment before making moves. First, imo I think we need to change the layout for the season effects table quite a bit for the WPac. The layouts for the PHS and AHS are much neat, I should say. Also, for example, take a look in the 2016 PTS article, the table is huge and I did discussed this to you about how large that article is. What do you think? Typhoon2013 (talk) 11:15, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: AFAIK, timelines should only include tropical cyclones monitored by the official RSMC/TCWC of their respective basins. There was some change on this subject? ABC paulista (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
The way we deal with it is looking on a case by case basis at whats going, after all both the JMA and JTWC issue reasoning's for their forecasts in the WPAC. Sometimes you will find that the JTWC stand up because its landfall, while others because its going through the extratropical transition process. I personally feel that we are going around in circles here and that it would be beneficial to you if you wrote an article on a semi-significant TC, as that would help answer any major questions you have.Jason Rees (talk) 22:09, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
FWIW (and let me preface this with my longstanding belief that we don't need the timelines for season articles as they are essentially forks), I use the official agencies even outside of their jurisdiction (JMA recognizing something in CPAC territory) as well as any other storms that meet Wiki's verification policy, namely that they are cited by a reputable source, such as Gary Padgett or David Roth, or NOAA/Canadian Hurricane Centre/other national weather center. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 23:17, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017
Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Jason. As you already know that may main concern in PTS articles is the length of the article and becomes "too big", especially for the Refs section, I have decided that we should use sources just based on JMA and JTWC BT. This is just to reduce the number of sources stated in a storm section. I did some editing in the 2014 PTS article a while ago and used JMA BT for sources. Although if a storm has an article for itself, then we could be free with sources and put as many as we want, I guess. This is just to let you know and your thoughts of it. Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:04, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:26, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
If we count ACE Indices for subtropical storms too, then do we count 'monsoon depressions' with 35kts? I am currently finishing the 2015 PTS ACE Indices from JTWC and found out that in Dujuan's BT, there was a period where it had 35kt winds, but it was classified as an 'MD'. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you have reverted some edits in which I changed the unit of measurement of rain in Houston from mm to cm. What I don't understand is your edit summary, which says "the record is measured in mm not cm." Only problem is that the actual record is measured in inches or hundredths of an inch, not in metric units at all. If you can please cite specifically to where the official record is in millimeters, that would be much appreciated? Thank you. 2600:1003:B004:C864:0:9:8E97:3201 (talk) 17:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Hey Jason, on an edit you made to List_of_Category_5_Atlantic_hurricanes, back in April, I believe you introduced a few uncited references that still exist today (they show up as the red text in the references section). Did this content originally come from another article or something? If I could get a hint, I could figure things out and fix the missing citations. This mistake usually happens when references are abbreviated with a name, defined at the beginning of an article and as a result when later text is copied to another article, the name doesn't point to any actual citation. I'd appreciate your help! -Verdatum (talk) 14:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi @Verdatum:, Ill see what I can do over the next couple of days to improve the list, but if you look at their entries on List of retired Atlantic hurricanes you should be able to find the references i think.Jason Rees (talk) 12:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 24, August-September 2017
Arabic, Kiswahili and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:53, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
If its true that other TCs and Sub TCs have formed in the Southeast Pacific region, can you please update the article draft with that info? It would be really helpful, especially given the notability of the storm in question (Katie). Also, you should note that the tropical cyclones article currently says that Katie is the first-ever tropical/subtropical system ever observed in the Southeast Pacific. If this is not true, then you should change it, and add in the sources. LightandDark2000 (talk) 19:55, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
@LightandDark2000: to ensure he sees this message.Jason Rees (talk) 01:38, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
The final round of the 2017 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2017 WikiCup top three finalists:
In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:
Over the course of the 2017 WikiCup the following content was added or improved on Wikipedia: 51 Featured Articles, 292 Good Articles, 18 Featured Lists, 1 Featured Picture, 1 Featured Topics, 4 Good Topics, around 400 Did You Knows, 75 In The News, and 442 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.
Regarding the prize vouchers - @Adityavagarwal, Vanamonde93, Casliber, Bloom6132, 1989, and SounderBruce: please send Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) an email from the email address to which you would like your Amazon voucher sent. Please include your preference of global Amazon marketplace as well. We hope to have the electronic gift cards processed and sent within a week.
We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2018 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:42, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
As we now have Haikui, should we add the year for Typhoon Haikui (2012)? Especially how I'm making a 2017 Haikui article. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
So the 2017 WikiCup has come to an end. Congratulations to the winner, to the other finalists and to all those who took part. 177 contestants signed up, more than usual, but not all of them submitted entries in the first round. Were editors attracted by the cash prizes offered for the first time this year, or were these irrelevant? Do the rules and scoring need changing for the 2018 WikiCup? If you have a view on these or other matters, why not join in the WikiCup discussion about next year's contest? Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
How is the calculated ACE of SHEM cyclones considered as OR? If all NHEM basin articles states about its ACE, can't we do the same for the SHEM? Also should it be OR, it will of course be from my own calculations, but I use the JTWC/NRL trackfile for this, as usual. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 25, October – November 2017
Arabic, Korean and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees.
As one of Wikipedia's most experienced editors, |
Hi, JR. I don't know if this is weird because we all know that Wikipedia is Wikipedia and we edit articles. But I don't feel comfortable with this user anymore and this user thinks she is better than anyone else and just attacks people instead of kindly saying it. I went to you instead because you're absolutely fine and do trust you a lot. Thanks so much. Typhoon2013 (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees.
I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged. |
I should've told you this earlier, but per BoM's forecast map, it showed that the system had reached cat2 intensity, though it was only a cat1 per its bulletins. Should we just stick to cat1 as that is our only source? Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:25, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Just realized this. So we pretty much sorted Bolaven out already as it was considered to be part of both the 2017 and 2018 seasons. Then should we do the same for Raquel? Typhoon2013 (talk) 04:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Five years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi JR, I noticed that this storm on IBTrACS was a 35 kt unnamed tropical storm in the 1968-69 SWIO season, but that it was not on the article. Although, it has no track from Reunion listed in IBTrACS, Neumann cites Reunion as the source for his data. I was wondering if you knew anything about it and whether we should include it in the season article. atomic7732 21:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
BoM would have had information on the system at the time since they were the warning centre in charge of the system not Reunion. Anyway I’ll have another look at that data tomorrow, when I have a fresh pair of eyes.Jason Rees (talk) 03:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Re: this edit. Please see this for an explanation. He requested I revert all of his bot's edits within a certain time frame, anticipating that some false positives would be reverted. Thanks. Nihlus 00:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 26, December – January 2018
Arabic and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
On 14 February 2018, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Cyclone Gita, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT♦C 00:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, JasonRees. I'll appreciate it if you do not arbitrarily edit the pages; other editors lose valuable time by reversing your actions and tarnish the image that an occasional Wikipedia visitor can make. In addition, arbitrary editions can be considered an act of vandalism (which would force us to block you). You can visit the help page to get information and you have the test area to do editing tests. Thank you.--TheHurricaneEditorMaker (talk) 00:38, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that on 2017 Pacific typhoon season#International names I tried to make the text disappear. Not make it visible. Also both you and the other editor actually made the text visible. So I fixed it. Sincerely, IP user 2602:306:8BB9:4E20:3CC6:3B6D:0:4E10 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:8BB9:4E20:3CC6:3B6D:0:4E10 (talk) 13:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.
Our top scorers in round 1 were:
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Can you start the MH on Hola since I put an article up for it? You seemed to do pretty good with the MH for Gita so I think some of your work could be appreciated there too. --MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 20:34, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 27, February – March 2018
Arabic, Chinese and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.
There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how ((infobox ship)) is parsed).
If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.
Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Jason I’m new here and I have been getting blocked for no reason lately.
I got unblocked by another administrator though because he saw my request and then spoke to the person who blocked me. But then he did it again. I got unblocked again by the same user and then the other user tried to block me again. I feel like I being abused. I just a kid too. Can you help. I feel mad and stressed about this guy. New person ~ 17:59 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18A:8400:5210:C081:8F62:A618:5ECB (talk)
Jason um I need help. Can you help me out? ~ 18:17 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18A:8400:5210:19C0:587:93FD:1C2E (talk)
Hi Jason So today a unknown person edited Hurricane Mitch on Wikipedia. HurricaneMichael99 (talk) 19:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Ok I want to join this group as I love hurricanes and tropical cyclones. I know them Alot.
How do I join the project and get some help? Tardis 9:59 AM (EDT)
The second round of the 2018 WikiCup has now finished. Most contestants who advanced to the next round scored upwards of 100 points, but two with just 10 points managed to scrape through into round 3. Our top scorers in the last round were:
So far contestants have achieved twelve featured articles between them and a splendid 124 good articles. Commendably, 326 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2018 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met; most of the GARs are fine, but a few have been a bit skimpy.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 28, April – May 2018
Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
The third round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Contestants managed 7 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 120 good articles, 1 good topic, 124 DYK entries, 15 ITN entries, and 132 good article reviews. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 458 GA reviews, in comparison to 244 good articles submitted for review and promoted. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process; several submissions, particularly in abstruse or technical areas, have needed additional work to make them completely verifiable.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk), Vanamonde (talk) 04:55, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
For the Tropical cyclones in 2010, I was adding each storm that had some impact on land (deaths and damage) or set records. FigfiresSend me a message! 12:59, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hurricane Hector (2018) 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/Hurricane Hector (2018) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. FigfiresSend me a message! 17:11, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey, was just wondering what you think about the Hurricane Hector (2018) article. I have been working hard to get a decent article developed for Hector over the last week. FigfiresSend me a message! 23:29, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
I also removed one category mention and a mistake someone else made. No need for Cat 5 to be mentioned at all since it wasn't reached.FigfiresSend me a message! 16:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
There was a corresponding talk page with what appears to be reference links. I assumed you wanted the talk page deleted, too, but if you want it back, I can restore it for you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Do you think that this could be of use somewhere? I got tired of calculating ACE so I made a table of values. FigfiresSend me a message! 22:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Both tracks are finally updated – I converted the Wellington winds from 10-min to 1-min to match the JTWC best track points. :) — Iunetalk 18:45, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 29, June – July 2018
Hindi, Italian and French versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
The fourth round of the 2018 WikiCup has now come to an end. The eight users who made it to the final round had to score a minimum of 422 points to qualify, with the top score in the round being 4869 points. The leaders in round 4 were:
During round four, 6 featured articles and 164 good articles were promoted by WikiCup contestants, 13 articles were included in good topics and 143 good article reviews were performed. There were also 10 "in the news" contributions on the main page and 53 "did you knows". Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best editor win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with my edit. It is relevant regardless. Irma was retired in the 2017 season. Even if I put the sentence in parentheses it still gives the information.
In rhetoric, a parenthesis (plural: parentheses; from the Ancient Greek word παρένθεσις parénthesis 'injection, insertion', literally '(a) putting in beside') or parenthetical phrase is an explanatory or qualifying word, clause, or sentence inserted into a passage. The parenthesis could be left out and still form grammatically correct text.[1] Parentheses are usually marked off by round or square brackets, dashes, or commas. -Wikipedia, Parenthesis
Other articles say the same thing I said. Hurricanes Allen and Mitch said what I was trying to say. So please understand that it's not fair that I can't edit what ever I want to edit.Flasty Jam 2 (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Ok. If Idalia get retired in the 2023 Season then I will say it on the Irma page. I will not go back to Irene and say it because you are getting further away from the topic. One sentence should be enough on each page. So yeah I would not go that far anyway.Flasty Jam 2 (talk) 16:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Why would you do that? Maybe I shouldn't have told you. Now you ruined it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flasty Jam 2 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Why only Lexi deleted, what difference about them ? 116.105.225.59 (talk) 21:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
I don't understand why Katie is more important and has to have an article and Lexi doesn't wny don't you just merge or something Northatlantic320 (talk) 21:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
The "claim" that JTWC designated and tracked "Q" systems in South Atlantic came from whoever wrote (or last edited) Invest (meteorology) before I joined Wikipedia. After reading South Atlantic tropical cyclone, I found out the truth: it wasn't JTWC, but Naval Research Laboratory-Monterey's Marine Meteorological Division who tracked 90Q systems. Since both JTWC and NRL fall within the command of the U.S. Navy, it appears that the article's author conflated/confused the two. So I fixed the table template, and also fixed the flawed claim on the invest article to avoid any further confusions. SilSinn9821 (talk) 04:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
Thankee for expanding the table, although I had to clean up formatting a little bit for self-consistency. Can you also provide references supporting the numbering scheme used by non-US warning centers? SilSinn9821 (talk) 00:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 30, August – Septmeber 2018
French version of Books & Bytes is now available in meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
You mentioned that name when discussing what could happen if the cyclone number limit of 30 observed by the NHC version of ATCF (which apparently differs somewhat from the JTWC version which goes up to 49) was ever exceeded. Who is Euston? (BTW we already have TC-31W aka Yutu, or shall I say TY-31W or even ST-31W?) SilSinn9821 (talk) 22:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: Hi Jason. I just wanted to address a couple of things regarding our disagreement over whether or not Liua was an ex-tropical cyclone in the Australian region.
Firstly, the 00 UTC 29 September MSLP chart from the Bureau of Meteorology supports my position. The low-pressure system associated with Tropical Cyclone Liua is displayed at around 13°S 159°E, which is within the Australian region by a margin of 1 degree of longitude. The system is represented by a capital 'L' to denote the existence of a low-pressure system. This fact is significant, because the Bureau of Meteorology denotes systems of tropical cyclone intensity with a separate tropical cyclone symbol, replacing the 'L'. This is exemplified here with both Severe Tropical Storm Bouchra and Cyclonic Storm Gaja (referred to as merely 'tropical cyclone' in both cases). I don't know how much you know about the Bureau of Meteorology, but I am Australian, so I am pretty familiar with most of their products and services, and I can vouch that this is always the case. Additionally, above the 'L' in the 29 September MSLP chart I provided, the text 'Ex-TC Liua' is visible, although the letter 'E' is obscured by the low-pressure system symbol. Another example of this, just to show that it isn't a coincidental occurrence, is with Tropical Cyclone Iris in April 2018. This chart shows Iris as a category 1 cyclone, and the next chart (six hours later) shows that it has weakened to a tropical low, with the label 'Ex-TC Iris'. Note that during the time that the BOM still considers the system a tropical low, the 'Ex-TC ___' label is usually present on MSLP charts accompanying the 'L', rather than just the 'L' by itself like in any normal low-pressure system. As a result, I believe it is clear that my reference to the tropical low form of Liua as 'Ex-Tropical Cyclone Liua' is accurate and in accordance with the BOM's usage.
Secondly, Liua was not considered a tropical low between 25 and 26 September by the Bureau of Meteorology. No mention of this was made in the daily Tropical Cyclone Outlook for the Eastern Region on these days (the daily outlooks can be found here). Unfortunately, no archives of these outlooks exist, so you'll have to take my word for it that the system wasn't mentioned (and believe me, I wanted it to be mentioned, because I really wanted to be able to begin the 2018-19 Australian season). Further evidence of the fact that Liua was not a tropical low in the Australian region is that the designation of the system was 01F, not 01U, meaning it was classified by the Fiji Meteorological Service, specifically when at coordinates 10.0°S 160.1°E (so almost in the Australian region, but not quite). The advisory from the FMS that supports this is here. Even if it had been classified as a tropical low while in the Australian region, that would not preclude it being an ex-tropical cyclone later on, as you stated in your edit summary.
Thirdly, it's not really useless trivia. If that was the case, then most of what cyclone articles are is useless trivia. This is because damage totals, maximum sustained wind speed, sea surface temperatures beneath the system and things like that aren't really that useful after the event. They're just interesting things to know. The only real non-trivial information in cyclone articles is 'what happened' in a human sense. That is, the actual destruction it caused, or impacts it had, on human communities. It isn't necessary to remove a two-line point about an interesting note regarding Ex-Liua. It doesn't detract from the article; rather, I would contend that it actually adds more good content. I do, however, acknowledge your assertion that it is at present unsourced. I will rectify that issue as best I can.
Hopefully all of this makes sense. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask! ChocolateTrain (talk) 23:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Good to meet at WMUK just now. Andrew D. (talk) 19:04, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
I would like to have my username added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones#Participants, but it says I must first be invited via ((WP:WPTC/Invite)). I have previously improved articles on some ancient hurricanes hitting Puerto Rico, like Great Hurricane of 1780 and 1928 Okeechobee hurricane, plus improved Invest (meteorology) to the point that it was no longer considered a stub article, and I would like to draft an article on Tropical cyclone numbering (basically a spin-off of a section within Tropical cyclone) and also translate some of the articles to Spanish. --SilSinn9821 (talk) 02:34, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
FYI regarding your recent edit to 2016–17 South Pacific cyclone season, the use of disp=5
is no longer supported by ((convert)). Checkout what happens when you preview
((convert|210|km|mi|disp=5|abbr=on))
and you will see that there is an error message. I saw this because it populated Category:Convert errors. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:26, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 31, October – Novemeber 2018
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello and Happy New Year!
Welcome to the 2019 WikiCup, the competition begins today. If you have already joined, your submission page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and we will set up your submissions page. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2019, and which you have nominated this year, is eligible for points in the competition, the judges will be checking! Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Six years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cyclone Raja you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hurricane Noah -- Hurricane Noah (talk) 22:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
The article Cyclone Raja you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cyclone Raja for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. NoahTalk 18:10, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Cyclone Raja at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Good luck with FA and all the best, Miniapolis 17:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC) |
The second round of the 2019 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to scored 32 points to advance into round 3. Our top four scorers in round 2 all scored over 400 points and were:
Other notable performances were put in by Barkeep49 with six GAs, Ceranthor, Lee Vilenski, and Canada Hky, each with seven GARs, and MPJ-DK with a seven item GT.
So far contestants have achieved nine featured articles between them and a splendid 80 good articles. Commendably, 227 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2019 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. The judges are pleased with the thorough GARs that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Cyclone Raja article has been scheduled as today's featured article for June 11, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/June 11, 2019.—Wehwalt (talk) 15:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Jason. I see what you're saying with regards to not hiding the main article link. However, I can't move the stub Veronica article to draft space because a redirect exists at Draft:Cyclone Veronica. Regardless, the current article is lacking severely in several areas, and it certainly does not warrant being called the main article, or even to be in mainspace. I discussed this on She-Hulka's talk page, as that is the editor who created the article, but I am yet to receive any acknowledgement regarding this or my numerous edit summaries to that effect. Perhaps you could help with moving the article somewhere? ChocolateTrain (talk) 12:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: Hi there again. I'd just like to discuss the affected areas for Cyclone Ann and see what your opinion is. Early in the cyclone's lifetime, there was a significant amount of convection over the southern semicircle of the system's circulation. This extended down to northern New Caledonia (see here). At the time, I checked on the Météo-France New Caledonia website, and it showed sustained winds in the mid to high 30 km/h range in areas on the northern and northwestern coasts, and these winds may have increased later on. Admittedly, I didn't archive the website, so I don't have a surviving source for this. It may also be the case that the increased winds were due in part to a trough that was located nearby around the same time. Regarding Papua New Guinea, as far as I know, there is no way of checking weather observations on the PNG National Weather Service's website. The reason I added the country to the list of affected areas (it should really just be 'Southern Papua New Guinea') was because the cyclone came within about 400 km of the coastline, so it is likely that there was at least a swell or some higher waves along the coast at some point (400 km is not a very long way on a geographical scale in terms of cyclones). Also, in the peak intensity image in the infobox, the outer rainband can be seen actually crossing southeastern Papua New Guinea. As such, there may have been some showers or increased winds in the area. I don't really mind if they're taken away as affected areas. I'll leave it up to you. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Volume XIV, Issue 39, May 31, 2019 The Hurricane Herald is the arbitrarily periodical newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The newsletter aims to provide in summary the recent activities and developments of the WikiProject, in addition to global tropical cyclone activity. The Hurricane Herald has been running since its first edition ran on June 4, 2006; it has been almost thirteen years since that time. If you wish to receive or discontinue subscription to this newsletter, please visit the mailing list. This issue of The Hurricane Herald covers all project related events from April 14–May 31, 2019. This edition's editor and author is Hurricane Noah (talk · contribs). Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve the newsletter and other cyclone-related articles. Past editions can be viewed here. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Article of the month, by Jason Rees History of tropical cyclone naming - The practice of using names to identify tropical cyclones goes back several centuries, with storms named after places, saints or things they hit before the formal start of naming in each basin. The credit for the first usage of personal names for weather systems is given to the Queensland Government Meteorologist Clement Wragge, who named tropical cyclones and anticyclones between 1887 and 1907. This system of naming fell into disuse for several years after Wragge retired, until it was revived in the latter part of World War II for the Western Pacific basin. Over the following decades, various naming schemes have been introduced for the world's oceans, including for parts of the Atlantic, Pacific and the Indian Ocean. The majority of these lists are compiled by the World Meteorological Organization's tropical cyclone committee for the region and include names from different cultures as well as languages. Over the years there has been controversy over the names used at various times, with names being dropped for religious and political reasons. For example, female names were exclusively used in the basins at various times between 1945 - 2000 and were the subject of several protests. The names of significant tropical cyclones in the North Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean and Australian region are retired from the naming lists and replaced with another name, at meetings of the various tropical cyclone committees. Storm of the month and other tropical activity Cyclone Fani was an extremely severe cyclonic storm that made landfall in Odisha, India on May 3. The storm achieved peak intensity as a near Category 5-equivalent cyclone with 3-minute sustained winds of 215 km/h (130 mph), 1-minute sustained winds of 250 km/h (155 mph), and a minimum central pressure of 937 hPa (mbar). Fani caused over $1.8 billion (2019 USD) in damage in India and Bangladesh and killed at least 89 people.
New WikiProject Members since the last newsletter in April 2019 More information can be found here. This list lists members who have joined/rejoined the WikiProject since the release of the last issue in April 2019. Sorted chronologically. Struckout users denote users who have left or have been banned. To our new members: welcome to the project, and happy editing! Feel free to check the to-do list at the bottom right of the newsletter for things that you might want to work on. To our veteran members: thank you for your edits and your tireless contributions! Editorial for welcoming new users, by Hurricanehink Every year, editors new and old help maintain the new season of season articles. The older users are likely used to the standards of the project, such as how to Wikilink and reference properly. Newer users might make mistakes, and they might make them over and over again if they don't know better. If anyone (who happens to read this) comes across a new user, please don't bite, because with enough pushback, they'll decide that this group of editors is too mean, and unfun. This is all a volunteer project; no one can force anyone to do anything. We're all on here because of our love of knowledge and tropical cyclones. If you find someone new, consider using the official WPTC welcome template - Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Welcome. I also encourage that if you know any tropical cyclone researchers, please speak up and try recruiting them to edit. Veteran editors can't keep editing forever. Life gets busy, and the real world beckons! Member of the month (edition) – Yellow Evan Yellow Evan has been involved with WPTC since 2008. Since the last newsletter, Yellow Evan has taken 5 typhoon articles to good article status as well as created 2 more. Overall, he has created and/or significantly contributed to more than 130 good articles. Your work in the Western Pacific Basin is invaluable... Thank you for your contributions! Latest WikiProject Alerts The following are the latest article developments as updated by AAlertBot, as of the publishing of this issue. Due to the bot workings, some of these updates may seem out of place; nonetheless, they are included here. Featured article candidates
Good article nominees
Good topic candidates
Requested moves
Articles to be merged
Articles for creation Updated daily by AAlertBot — Discuss? / Report bug? / Request feature?
Click to watch (Subscribe via RSS Atom) · Find Article Alerts for other topics!
This section lists content that have become featured, articles and lists, since the past newsletter in mid-April 2019.
WikiProject Tropical Cyclones: News & Developments
New articles since the last newsletter include:
New GA's include:
Current assessment table Assessments valid as of this printing. Depending on when you may be viewing this newsletter, the table may be outdated. See here for the latest, most up to date statistics.
From the Main Page From the Main Page documents WikiProject related materials that have appeared on the main page from April 14–May 31, 2019 in chronological order. WikiProject To-Do Project Goals & Progress The following is the current progress on the three milestone goals set by the WikiProject as of this publishing. They can be found, updated, at the main WikiProject page.
|
NoahTalk 21:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for Cyclone Raja, a severe tropical cyclone which impacted the South Pacific over the New Year of 1986/87! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: Do you reckon you'd be able to give me a little help defending the templates that I made for the C2, C3 and C4 Australian region cyclones? B dash has nominated them for deletion, unfortunately. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
The third round of the 2019 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round needed to score at least 68 points, which is substantially lower than last year's 227 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Contestants managed 4 (5) featured articles, 4 featured lists, 18 featured pictures, 29 good articles, 50 DYK entries, 9 ITN entries, and 39 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and it is imperative to claim them in the correct round; one FA claim had to be rejected because it was incorrectly submitted (claimed in Round 3 when it qualified for Round 2), so be warned! When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Jason. I was wondering if you know how to download an animated clip of several satellite images from the RAMMB/CIRA slider image viewer. The path of the shadow of yesterday's total solar eclipse across the southern Pacific Ocean is clearly visible south of Hurricane Barbara nearing peak intensity. It is a very cool series of images, and it would look great in an article, but I have never been able to download images or clips from that website. Here is a link for you to take a look. ChocolateTrain (talk) 06:02, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Take your smarmy edit summary and shove it up your ass. DrKay (talk) 16:50, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019
French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your ongoing work with tropical cyclones. Unfortunately, a relatively recent edit you made to a template "broke" existing uses of that template. Because others have used the current version of the template, I did not "just revert it." See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones#Cleanup needed for all uses of Template:Australian areas affected (Top) for the discussion. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:35, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Adam Cuerden (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 91 featured pictures, including 32 in the final round. Our finalists this year were:
All those who reached the final will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field. Awards will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved much this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
We have opened a scoring discussion on whether the rules and scoring need adjustment. Please have your say. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2020 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth 14:18, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC) oh okay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funnynick2590 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Why this edition: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Waterspout&oldid=prev&diff=933841890 THe IP user did not improve on the article, in fact he/she remove information and instead added useless details. You provided no reason for your intervention.
Pierre cb (talk) 15:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: Hi there. How are you doing? I just wanted to see what you thought about the name for the timeline section in the season articles. I know that all of the other articles use "Seasonal summary" as the section heading, but in reality we rarely actually make a summary for the Australian seasons. It is almost always just the timeline. In some other basins, specifically the Atlantic, East Pacific and West Pacific, we do indeed make summaries. For that reason, "Season timeline" is a more logical heading for the Australian articles. If you still want the "Seasonal summary", though, I think it should be amended slightly to "Season summary". The word seasonal has a slightly different meaning. ChocolateTrain (talk) 16:25, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Seven years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Jason. I just wanted to let you know where I got the 1000 hPa pressure value for TD 06F from. The Bureau of Meteorology is officially responsible for issuing high seas forecasts and marine warnings for the region of the northern Coral Sea extending from 142E to 170E, rather than just to 160E like the cyclone region (although, it would probably make sense for the Australian region to actually extend to 170E in the northern Coral Sea and to 80E in the Indian Ocean). The BOM's North Eastern Area High Seas Forecast for 18:00 UTC on 6 February gives the pressure of the low as 1000 hPa, with the system located at 14S 162E. It's strange that this would conflict with the FMS. By the way, where did you find an 18Z advisory from the FMS? I am not completely familiar with where the FMS publishes all of their advisories, and the only one I can find is the Tropical Disturbance Summary for 06Z on 6 February. ChocolateTrain (talk) 03:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi again Jason. Perhaps it is just my computer, but even with the infobox header saying "Aus scale", the intensity category always gets split into two lines when the system is Category 3 or above due to how long "severe tropical cyclone" is. For that reason, I think it would be better to have "Australian scale" rather than "Aus scale", given that the split-line formatting issue exists anyway. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:06, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: Have you seen what the GFS is forecasting for the next three days around the International Date Line in the South Pacific? It is showing no less than four tropical cyclones developing all in a line, one of which is shown to reach hurricane intensity and the other three to get winds of at least 50 knots. It also shows two other short-lived gale-force systems in the mix. So, we could conceivably see six tropical cyclones develop in the same place within the space of a few days. Incredible. If that were to happen, this season would already become the equal-ninth most active season in the last half century, and it's only mid-February. ChocolateTrain (talk) 14:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.
Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: I have no idea what the BOM and the JTWC are doing at the moment regarding Ex–Esther. Firstly, the BOM showed Ex–Esther's pressure as 1001 hPa in their MSLP chart at 12:00 UTC on 29 February, when at the very same time, there was an actual pressure observation at the Derby automatic weather station showing 990.0 hPa. Unless I am missing something, that seems beyond incompetent. Then, at 22:00 UTC on 29 February, the JTWC cancelled their TCFA for Ex–Esther claiming that "Minimum sea level pressure is estimated to be near 998 mbar." Well, clearly that estimate is useless and they need to devise a new technique, because the actual physical observation at the Curtin AFB automatic weather station at that time was 991.4 hPa. They also claimed that "Maximum sustained surface winds are estimated at 25 to 30 knots." Once again, this is a ridiculous estimate. The 10-minute sustained winds were measured at 28 knots at Derby at 22:00 UTC, and had been as high as 30 knots in the previous three-and-a-half hours. These speeds correspond to roughly 31–34 knots one-minute sustained (not 25–30!), which is what the JTWC uses. This should be high enough to reclassify Esther as a TS, considering these wind speeds would have been slowed from the actual maximum winds by the frictional effects of land, and it is extremely rare that an observation station actually records the peak winds in a system. Furthermore, the JTWC indicated sustained winds of 35 knots while the system tracked across the entire Northern Territory and most of the Kimberley, despite not a single observation station showing winds anywhere near that. So, when the Derby weather station actually indicates one-minute winds of 34 knots, they should absolutely be classifying the system as a TS, with winds of at least 35 knots. What also annoys me is neither the BOM nor the JTWC seems to have recognised, or couldn't be bothered to document, the significant redevelopment that Ex–Esther underwent while near the coast. The system developed a curved band of deep convection wrapping most of the way around the system and into the centre, with widespread cloud top temperatures of less than –60°C and -70°C, and less than –80°C in places as well. Additionally, an MSL pressure reading of 988.8 hPa was made at Curtin AFB at 15:00 UTC on 29 February, when the centre was not even over that weather station (so, the actual central pressure at that time was probably 988 hPa, or maybe even 987). I don't know what planet we are on when 988 hPa and massively increasing convection does not correspond to AT LEAST a 35-knot tropical storm. The estimates that the JTWC gave in their TCFA clearly show that they weren't even looking at actual ground observations to inform their decisions, and honestly, I have no idea what the BOM was doing.
Sorry about all this. I just needed to rant to someone! ChocolateTrain (talk) 04:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Hi and it has been a while. I just wanted to know if there are users out there who archive sources like what Keith did in the past? The TCWC Perth actually tracked a weak TL on April 3rd but was only mentioned in one bulletin, but one user took my edit out and scrapped it. Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
@Jason Rees: If you recall, we were wondering a while back whether or not Tropical Cyclone Blake was the 2019–20 Australian region cyclone season's first system. None of us knew of any previous systems, and yet we recognised that Blake had received the identifier 02U, which suggested that there may have been a system before then. We decided to hold off on saying that this season was the latest start on record until we knew that there were no other systems before Blake. Well, I can confirm that Blake was indeed the first system. I have been in contact with a meteorologist at the Bureau of Meteorology several times over the past few months. He has been providing some clarification on various details which we have been unsure about. He confirmed that 02U (Blake) was the first identified tropical low of the season; 01U was mistakenly assigned to the disturbance that became Tropical Cyclone Rita in the South Pacific basin. I will update the lead section of the article to reflect this new information. I just thought it would be good to let you know first. ChocolateTrain (talk) 08:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in round 2 were:
The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
I am not edit fake data. I am edit real information. The data source JTWC and windy weather. The depression making in 9 may Vala keep (talk) 19:53, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020
On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Template:List of named tropical cyclones start has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TheImaCow (talk) 19:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Nikkimaria (talk) 21:08, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
@Hurricanehink: I think we need another one :P. Jason Rees (talk) 13:43, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Excuse me, Jason Rees. Why did you think that I was a troll? Remember, Bbb23 was not happy three days after he retired. I'm not a troll. I'd like you to take a moment and look at my contributions. And yes, I've tried to look at my past mistakes. Here's a timeline.
In my edit summary: "... Talk:Cyclone Owen/GA1 will soon be created", I was right, but I didn't know that so many things were wrong with it. I thought it would just be like "Your hard work looks great! It's a GA now." But NO! You make a month's hard work look like a stub! I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but I guess that something that I put a whole lot of time and work into will just be another start-class. 🐔 Chicdat ChickenDatabase 10:39, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
For the stubbornness of the British people, whether insisting on having a say in every continent (which brushed off on the US), or because of your recent independence streak (resulting in the possible loss of Northern Ireland and Scotland), I award you this goat. May your stubbornness be used for good, especially if you're the only one that thinks you are right. Cheers mate.
♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
One person spoiled the article of the 2020 Northern Indian Ocean cyclone season and please take action on it. Janm 7 (talk) 08:47, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
I'm thinking about archiving JTWC outlook warnings and TCFAs via my backup email to lessen the burden on Meow. Because JMA and JTWC TC warnings are being archived everyday by the MT Archive, so it would be helpful to know some websites that emails the archived JTWC warnings day-to-day. Regards, 👦 05:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Jason, I have a question and/or request. Is there a specific way to join the WikiProject Tropical cyclones? I've been wanting to join for a few years now and haven't really been sure on how to do. I would love to help out on the project in anyway I can. Thanks, --Gumballs678 (talk) 19:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pre-1945 North Indian Ocean cyclone seasons. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 20#Pre-1945 North Indian Ocean cyclone seasons until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 05:12, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Why did you do this: [4] ? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
User:Lolitasaffy is a sockpuppet of User:Lolasaffy. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 11:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Jason Rees. Are you okay with me helping you with your List of Pacific typhoons article? Thanks, 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 12:47, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
The 77,777 Edits Award | |
77,777 edits is a lot of edits... and a lot of lucky sevens! Thank you for all your |
The Tropical Cyclone Barnstar | ||
You know why I'm awarding this to you! ~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | |
Really?! Why you aren't getting these articles ready? Despite that however, i'll give you a respect for that. You deserve this barnstar. I hope these drafts are done. SMB99thx my edits 04:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC) |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
You should get respect for what you have done in these drafts. It took so long and it took so much time to get that finished. You also deserve this barnstar. SMB99thx my edits 04:03, 3 October 2020 (UTC) |
It appears that you haven't gotten any respect from others regarding to your articles and drafts. It's a lot. As such, i'll give you barnstars for your work! SMB99thx my edits 04:06, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Jason! Thanks for your opinion about 1960s Australian region cyclones and 1960s South Pacific cyclones individual articles. From your suggestion, I think they should be worked on the draft space. As such, I have moved should-be-articles you have reverted to redirects into draftspace, and these are Draft:1967–68 Australian region cyclone season, Draft:1968–69 Australian region cyclone season, and Draft:1969–70 Australian region cyclone season.
Apparently, you are currently working on a monster amount of drafts. For example, User:Jason Rees/Depressions. I'm tempted to move all of these articles, but i will not do that thing. Why you are not done with that stuff, especially the earlier drafts? BTW, apparently some of these drafts on articles you are working on are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Article requests, which is an area that I'm trying to get these requests fulfilled ASAP for 15th anniversary of WikiProject Tropical cyclones. I think i'm going to give you a barnstar for that. Thank you. SMB99thx my edits 03:34, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For good contributions to WPTC! CyclonicStormYutu (talk) 14:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC) |
You have done such great contributions in WPTC, so I give you this! CyclonicStormYutu (talk) 14:28, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
This is your only warning: You are engaged in an edit war at 2020–21 Australian region cyclone season. Edit warring is against Wikipedia’s rules. Be aware that you have already exceeded the three-revert limit, and you could be blocked if you do it again. I am glad to see you are discussing things, although it would be better to do so at the article’s talk page where other users can also participate. I am going to lock the article for 24 hours, to give you time to work it out. I trust you and the other user will be able to reach an amicable conclusion. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is Lee Vilenski (submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by Gog the Mild (submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points. The Rambling Man (submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with Epicgenius (submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.
The other finalists were Hog Farm (submissions), HaEr48 (submissions), Harrias (submissions) and Bloom6132 (submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!
All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.
Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I know that all the stuff that has been happening has been tough so here you go:
Cookies! | ||
Weatherman27 has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add ((subst:Cookies)) to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with ((subst:munch))! |
🌀Weatherman27🏈 (chat with me!). 19:37, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
You have at least two editors and maybe more collaborating together and causing difficulty. I suggest doing something about it. Howdoesitgo1 (talk) 23:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
You then seem to have left the season and its sub-articles alone for a couple of days before suddenly coming back on November 3, when you edited Zeta aand introduced more very broad and redundant language within these five edits and used various edit summaries including "river", "dir", "see tlk" and "emerg" (x2). Looking at Zeta's talk pages, I see that you did indeed initiate a conversation, however, it was considered to be a personal attack on Chess and reverted by @Destroyeraa:. The edits on Zeta were also reverted by Destroyeraa as he felt that they were "Unnecessary revisions and told you in the edit summary on the talk page to "Stop attacking ChessEric. Your revisions are even worse tbh. The original wording was fine and this is redundant." ((Destroye also left you a general warning on your talk page and left a general message on ChessEric's talkpage. This message said that "I [have] warned this users of making accusations without evidence. In addition, looking at his edits, most were unnecessary or disruptive. I have given the user a warning, and I hope his disruptive editing stops." You then came on and reintroduced your edits with the edit summaury see expl. on talk pg.
You also then proceeded to [reintroduce your attack on ChessEric with the edit summaury This is to destroy, if you want to be engaged in a topic or subject on the talk pg, fine. You are not allowed to edit someone else's edits on a talk pg. and then introduced this sentence with your next edit: I am not certain why destroy is involved here. The editor, if they want to be in a discussion fine, but to infer things that aren't true, no, that is not ok. You also posted the same message on Chess Eric's talk page before Drdpw (talk · contribs) then removed your commentson Zeta's talkpage with the edit summuary This talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for venting or for sniping at other editors. It’s removal was justified. You then decided to leave Drdpw (talk · contribs) a message on their talk page in which you alleged that "C. Eric [was incorrectly editing" but provided no evidence. You also told the user that they were "not supposed to edit on a talk page" and that she was welcome to join the discussion but was not correct in what she said].
I also see that you edited Hurricane Eta with the edit summary QST, removed the words or not and added Tropical Storm Matthew (2010) as a see also with the blurb a deadly tropical cyclone that affected similar areas. ChessEric also User:ChessEric disagreed with the addition of Matthew (2010) to the article as "the list was long enough as is" and removed it by undoing your edit but left the rest of your edit intact. You then reverted Eric and initiated a talk page conversation about faith. This conversation involved several users and was eventually closed by @TornadoLGS: after you went off topic and accused Eric of his OR understanding being incorrect, provided no evidence and stated that your edits were precise and correct. I am not going to judge you, however, I hope that @MelanieN: will factor this response into her response to your message on ehr talkpage.Jason Rees (talk) 03:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
For laying out the evidence on a heated content dispute. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:53, 9 November 2020 (UTC) |
You might want to participate in the ANI discussion regarding CyclonicallyDeranged and WP:AGF. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 12:47, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi there Jason,
I hope you're safe and well. I encourage you and Cyclonically to apologize to each other for mass reverting each other's edits and possibly insulting each other. Then, I hope you and Cyclonically can peacefully talk it out. I am reverting the season article to the version before the edit-warring. Thanks. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 14:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
This is for all of the hard work that you do to make Wikipedia a better place! 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 16:40, 26 November 2020 (UTC) |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
This is for all of your contributions and articles that you have created or improved! 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 16:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC) |
The Editor's Barnstar | |
And this is for all of your edits and hard work in general! 🌀Weatherman27🏈 (Chat|Edits|sandbox) 16:47, 26 November 2020 (UTC) |
CodingCyclone has given you a Turkey! Turkeys promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a turkey, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy Thanksgiving! 𝙲𝚘𝚍𝚒𝚗𝚐𝙲𝚢𝚌𝚕𝚘𝚗𝚎 ᴛᴀʟᴋ 19:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Spread the goodness of turkey by adding ((subst:Thanksgiving Turkey)) to their talk page with a friendly message. |
Hi, I have noticed that you have removed the gust. Actually it is used by JTWC. Gust and one minute sustained wind section is for JTWC. Beraniladri19🌀🌀 (talk) 04:44, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Sorry but thats not good enough since the 1 minute sustained wind is unofficial in this basin. Jason Rees (talk) 05:19, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Why should we prioritise the JTWCs wind gusts over any that Meteo France or Vanuatu Met give for Yasa? Jason Rees (talk) 05:33, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
I know what you meant but what will you do with the gust section?? Beraniladri19🌀🌀 (talk) 09:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
The Tropical cyclone Gold Barnstar | |
Thanks for creating the Template and many good articles in Wikiproject Tropical Cyclone. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 18:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hello Jason Rees: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, ~ Destroyer🌀🌀 01:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Jason Rees: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, 𝙲𝚘𝚍𝚒𝚗𝚐𝙲𝚢𝚌𝚕𝚘𝚗𝚎 ᴛᴀʟᴋ 01:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Can I please have some help with Owen? I've been trying to get it to GA for six months, yet significant issues with verifiability still stand. Thank you. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 13:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Eight years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:05, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Urgent - mass disruptive editing on AfDs. Thank you. SK2242 (talk) 10:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
So are we adding Tropical lows now when BoM states something like "a tropical low is gradually forming"? Typhoon2013 (talk) 06:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I have nominated Tropical 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. Femke Nijsse (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Is Template:Did you know nominations/Cyclone Meena ready for promotion? SL93 (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2021 (UTC) @SL93: I need to find some time to work on it further, but I don't see why it couldn't go up now.Jason Rees (talk) 19:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
On 9 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cyclone Meena, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Cyclone Meena was the first of four severe tropical cyclones to impact the Cook Islands in February 2005? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cyclone Meena. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cyclone Meena), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 12:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Please accept this invitation to join WikiProject Weather's Non-tropical storms task force (WPNTS), a task force dedicated to improving all articles associated with extratropical cyclones on Wikipedia. WPNTS hosts a number of Wikipedia's highly-viewed articles, and needs your help for the upcoming winter season (for whichever hemisphere happens to be in its climatological winter). Simply click here and add your name to the list to accept! |
HurricaneCovid (contribs) 18:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
I've read the email, though I am currently busy and won't be able to reply till tomorrow. Just wanted to let you know that I won't be able to reply immediately. JavaHurricane 14:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Hey, so you have fixed the gust problem but you have created another problem. Some RSMC don't publish wind gust so, many editors are putting the JTWC's gust in the RSMC's gust section which is causing confusion for readers, which you can see here. Please fix this. Beraniladri19 🌀🌀 03:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Cyclone Inigo, 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. --Whiteguru (talk) 11:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
The wind estimate I used for Wendy on the 1971-72 AUS region article was by (TCWC?) Wellington, which I think is reputable. Also, it appears that DS824 data is directly from the BOM, but I'm likely wrong here. What were the old 10-min estimates from? I couldn't find any BOM data, even on their spreadsheet. --SolarisPenguin (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive | |
July 2021 Backlog Drive:
| |
Other ways to participate: | |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.
Click here to opt out of any future messages. |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
An anonymous user is editing the Hurricane Elsa article putting explicit words, I already reversed several changes but it did not work, he keeps reversing using bad words. Help me!!! --МОДОКАУ 20:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are Gog the Mild, Lee Vilenski, BennyOnTheLoose, Amakuru and Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Newsletter/Archive 48 LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 19:51, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the reversion. I don't like getting things wrong but can you help me by telling which of the windspeeds did not come out right. I cannot detect the fault. Thanks. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Sorry for my bad wording, but should Australian region tropical cyclones that pass 90E (before the border was changed in 1985) be added to the corresponding South-West Indian Ocean pages? I believe this was previously discussed in a talk page, however the change never happened. Should I start making the changes now? SolarisPenguin (talk) 10:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Jason, most of the articles of cyclones that unofficially crossed to other basins doesn't include this unnoficial info on their infobox, just being contained on small, summarized spaces. And most of the basin's articles that have cyclones that unnoficially crossed into them don't include them on statistics, summaries, templates, just on a "other storm" section. So why it should be different on Durian's case? ABC paulista (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:
All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.
If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Jason. I'm just posting to let you know that Timeline of the 2003–04 South Pacific cyclone season – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for December 6. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 02:35, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi! can you edit all the Pages or Articles where Cyclone Yasa is still leading in 2020 which is the strongest because Typhoon Goni is stronger and FMS has weakened Cyclone Yasa so Goni is the Strongest. Daniel boxs (talk) 00:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I have nominated Tropical Storm Allison 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. Hog Farm Talk 04:00, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive | |
January 2022 Backlog Drive:
| |
Other ways to participate: | |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.
Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. |
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2022 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Nine years! |
---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
See my comment on the talk page. 🐔dat (talk) 11:27, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 48, November – December 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
And so ends the first round of the WikiCup. Last year anyone who scored more than zero points moved on to Round 2, but this was not the case this year, and a score of 13 or more was required to proceed. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others who qualified for Round 2, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews of a large number of good articles as the contest ran concurrently with a GAN backlog drive. Well done all! To qualify for Round 3, contestants will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two participants.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Anything that should have been claimed for in Round 1 is no longer eligible for points. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
The second round of the 2022 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 115 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top seven contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 11 featured articles and the 79 good articles achieved in total by contestants.
Our top scorers in round 2 were:
The rules for featured and good article reviews require the review to be of sufficient length; brief quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
https://pubfiles.pagasa.dost.gov.ph/climps/climateforum/special_lecture_tcws.pdf
Hey this is a Source. Daniel boxs (talk) 14:05, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi! can you clean-up this page? as you did on the "List of retired Philippines typhoon names" page. Daniel boxs (talk) 06:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC) @Daniel boxs: I will see what I can do at some point.Jason Rees (talk) 10:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Jason Rees. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cyclone Josie, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:52, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 49, January – February 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Jason, I think you are aware of this case, but do you have at least have any interest on making a brief statement about it? MarioJump83! 14:54, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. |
You mentioned in this edit about consistency about how to present wind speeds. I think you have a good point about using knots as the base unit and converting that, rather than presenting it already converted. I'm not sure if it's a standard, but what are your thoughts that maybe it should be? It would only take an AWB bot or two to fix every instance when we're talking rounded wind speeds (which is how we convey intensity), but not wind gusts (which are instantaneous wind observations not indicative of a storm's intensity, per se). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 50, March – April 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC) (UTC)
The third round of the 2022 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 180 points, which is a lower figure than last year when 294 points were needed to progress to round 4. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Between them contestants achieved 5 featured articles, 4 featured lists, 51 good articles, 149 DYK entries, 68 ITN entries, and 109 good article reviews. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article nomination, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. WikiCup judges: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
You're free to do whatever you want to my sandbox once it's published, but until then, if you're going to change every little thing in it, then you might as well move it to your userspace. Per WP:UP, you should avoid editing others' userpages if they don't want you to, or if the content there is disruptive. And I don't want you to, because there are errors in your revisions of the page All the stuff doesn't need to come from one source, and the addition of the cn tags in userspace has put the page in Category:User pages with reference errors. You say the pressure is "Not Specified" even though it is specified, just in a different source. Also, when IBTRACS gives pressure, you put it into a convert template with InHgs, something that is not done in the season articles or anywhere else. You should discuss all these changes on the project page, not just impose them unilaterally.
You can do all these things and more when the page is published, but until then, I'd like you to stop editing my sandbox, since it is in my userspace. 🇺🇦 Chicdat Bawk to me! 11:24, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 51, May – June 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.
At this stage, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For the remaining competitors, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 52, July – August 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
The 2022 WikiCup has drawn to a close with the final round going down to the wire. The 2022 champion is
During the WikiCup, contestants achieved 37 featured articles, 349 good articles, 360 featured article reviews, 683 good article reviews and 480 In the news items, so Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors. Well done everyone! All those who reached the final round will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or the overall leader in this field.
Next year's competition will begin on 1 January and possible changes to the rules and scoring are being discussed on the discussion page. You are invited to sign up to take part in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to have a good turnout for the 2023 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners and finalists, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
If you want to remove Humberto so much, then remove Lexi, Stephanie, and Katie too. There is no reason why we can't include Humberto when we have those three systems too.
Also, I returned the Humberto section. Try not to remove it again this time. Infinity The Second (talk) 21:36, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 53, September – October 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
Dear project member, This message is being sent out to encourage new ideas and feedback on those proposed in regard to the colors debate for WikiProject Weather. For those who are unaware of what's been happening over the last year, I will give a brief summary. We have been discussing proposed changes to the colors of the dots on tropical cyclone maps and templates and infoboxes across the entire weather project in order to solve issues related to the limited contrast between colors for both normal vision as well as the various types of color blindness (MOS:ACCESS). We had partially implemented a proposal earlier this year, however, it was objected to by a number of people and additional issues were presented that made it evident this wasn't the optimal solution. We tried to come up with other solutions to address the issues related to color contrast, however, none of them gained traction and no consensus was generated.
We need your help and I encourage you to propose your own scale and give feedback on those already listed. Keep in mind that we are NOT making a decision on any individual proposal at this time. We are simply allowing people to make proposals and cultivate them given feedback from other project members. Please visit our project page for additional details. The proposal phase will close no later than December 31st at 23:59 UTC. NoahTalk 03:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM))
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
As you have reverted to the previous table formatting at List of retired Pacific typhoon names please consider doing likewise in the other basins' retired names articles as well. They suffer from the same sorting issues. Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 20:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2023 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Jason Rees,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 16:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 16:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jason Rees. You seem to have an interest in weather-related articles on Wikipedia. So, I wanted to let you know about the ongoing discussions in relation to fixing the List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes section about List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes#Possible F5/EF5/T10+ tornadoes officially rated F4/EF4/T9 or lower. Some individual tornado discussions have already been formally closed, but others remain open. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:06, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello! This is to inform you that there is an ongoing discussion, which is proposal to 100% scrap (delete) the two possible F5/EF5/T10+ lists on the List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes article. Feel free to participate here! Elijahandskip (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Ice Hockey World Championships has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 05:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
On 15 February 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Cyclone Gabrielle, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
So ends the first round of the 2023 WikiCup. Everyone with a positive score moved on to Round 2, with 54 contestants qualifying. The top scorers in Round 1 were:
The top sixteen contestants at the end of Round 1 had all scored over 300 points; these included LunaEatsTuna, Thebiguglyalien, Sammi Brie, Trainsandotherthings, Lee Vilenski, Juxlos, Unexpectedlydian, SounderBruce, Kosack, BennyOnTheLoose and PCN02WPS. It was a high-scoring start to the competition.
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. The first round finished on February 26. Remember that any content promoted after that date but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
why i didn't see Kevin's category 5 peak when JTWC only updated 6 hours in a row at 135 kts Bóng Ma - Talk 13:48, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Good Afternoon Jason Rees I would like to apologize for this edit, didn't notice that Kevin was already on the template, cheers :). Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 20:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
I have a question, a tropical depression formed just above the equator in an inhomogeneous position between the JMA and the JTWC. While the JMA thinks it's in the Northern Hemisphere, the JTWC says it's in the Southern Hemisphere, has it broken the record for closest to the equator set by Tropical Storm Vamei in 2001? Bóng Ma - Talk 08:09, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Recently, I discovered several articles documenting the formation of an "extremely rare tropical cyclone" in the Southeast Pacific basin, near Peru, and unofficially named by the tracking agency as " Yaku". Should it be added to the South Pacific hurricane season? Vệ Thần - Talk 23:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:
Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie, Thebiguglyalien, MyCatIsAChonk, PCN02WPS, and AirshipJungleman29.
So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi Jason, I want to say that I am apologizing for what I have did to you in early 2021. I wasn't in a clear mental state at that time so I was being a little bit reckless in my attempt to bring Cyclone Owen into Good Article status. Please take it easy. As for myself I have been somewhat 'resting' during this semester of college, but otherwise being involved in student organizations. My focus has been mostly on maintaining my life and not on Wikipedia. MarioJump83 (talk) 05:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Hey. So a user in the List of costliest tornadoes in 2022 AfD mentioned that I should add secondary sources to the list. I started adding some. Minutes after adding pure references, another editor reverts my edit. How should I manage this situation? It was reverted with the summary, “rmv all sources that either don't mention damage figures at all or are a direct copy of NCEI, which is already sourced; for a page focused on damage, you can't have sources that simply talk about the tornado and fail to mention monetary estimates
”. I’m not sure what to do since generally, I would want to re-revert since removing references seems disruptive, but I really don’t want to debate. What should I do in this situation? Should I move into my sandbox to avoid being reverted until I can actually improve the article, or should I try to discuss the situation on the article talk page? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jason,
I'm user JayTee32 from WPTC and recently came off an extended Wikibreak. I'm preparing an article I created, Tropical Storm Hernan (2020), for A-Class (and of course to be an FAC eventually), but I know it's recommended that at least two editors peer-review the article before it's considered for A-Class. I was hoping you could peer review the article when you have the chance before I nominate for A-Class, seeing as you're on of the project's most experienced editors. It's previously been reviewed by Hurricanehink in 2021.
JayTee🕊️ 15:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Hey. So recently, myself and another editor created List of Storm Prediction Center meso—gamma mesoscale discussions and a few hours after moving into mainspace, USM nominated it for deletion. I wanted to ask if I did the response appropriately. I know I was mentioned, as an editor, in the AfD nomination, but I did not respond to that part of the nomination. Please don’t comment in the AfD as that would be canvassing. I’m just wanting to make sure I don’t get hot-headed in it and end up causing more problems down the road. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello! So I wanted to talk to you about the best way to approach a discussion I am wanting to start. Recently, I promoted the Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts article to be a “High importance” on the WP of International relations (originally was low). This promotion came from a look at article content combined with view count (337k views in 365 days and 24k views in 30 days). The next day, a different user restored the “Low importance” classification saying, Restoring "Low" importance for International Relations. The war is surely very important, but this annexation has already been largely forgotten.
A quick look at the participants of the WikiProject show that user is not a member of it (Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations#Participants), just like how I am not a member of the WikiProject either. Since there is a disagreement between users, I want to start a discussion on that WikiProject talk page to see what classification the article should be. Before I started a discussion that probably will have some level of disagreement between editors, I wanted to ask you about it and run it by you before starting the discussion. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 09:18, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much for that correction. The reporting on this weather event has been downright sloppy with facts, probably because mentioning these would make for a less "exciting" story. The AP said it was the "first", so I hesitated contradicting the source, however wrong it was. Incidentally, I remember Nora well. The winds briefly kicked up something fierce where I was living at the time; even spotted a funnel cloud. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Hey Jason Rees! So recently, I came across an AfD, which I participated in, where I was a support for a merge. Noting, I was not the article creator. The AfD nominator replied to my merge !vote, saying “Please don't use TV stations and newspaper articles as the basis for writing an earthquake article on the encyclopedia. That's fine on wikinews.
” Is there some guideline, where we cannot determine a topic’s notability based on the amount of media coverage? I mentioned in a reply comment to this user that articles like Hurricane Ian and the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake are sourced by mostly media sources. But, I wanted to ask you here, in case there is some guideline that I am not aware of, and one that I need to be aware of before creating articles. Also, since I’m mentioning the AfD to you, please don’t comment in it, since I’ve been told in the past that I would be canvassing. I’m just wanting to know if WP:GNG’s part about significant coverage cannot be determined by media sources, and has to be determined by academic/government sources (i.e. what they are saying). Thank you in advance! Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page 2022–23 European windstorm season, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:43, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
The edit I made to Cyclone Ian was because Cyclone Harvey has the same type of box thing at the top – Atlantic hurricane of the same name – so I thought Cyclone Ian could use the same. I am still not a familiar editor with Wikipedia and I feel like my edits are unappreciated. I did not know how to describe the edit.
VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022 (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Why did you decide to remove this section from List of retired South Pacific cyclone names but not the Atlantic or North Pacific articles? Doesnt seem very consistent. Why should some have it while others dont? Undescribed (talk) 04:33, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello again Jason,
I wanted to know if you could leave comments on/support my recent nomination of Tropical Storm Hernan (2020) for FA status, as you peer reviewed it for me a few months ago. I'd appreciate your input greatly. JayTee⛈️ 00:45, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM))
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! I'm currently working on a draft: Tropical Storm Lewis (1993) and I'm searching for sources. Could you help me determine sources that would be good for this type of article? NeoMadness (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), Epicgenius (talk · contribs · email), and Frostly (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 60, November – December 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
The JTWC is currently monitoring a subtropical cyclone in the South Pacific. If it develops, will it be added to the "other systems" section? ''Flux55'' (talk) 05:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Your GA, History of tropical cyclone naming, has been marked as Kept as a part of the 2024–25 WPWX Good Article Reassessment. Noah, AATalk 17:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.
Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:
As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.
The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:
In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.
Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.
Our current top scorers are as follows:
Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.
If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs), Epicgenius (talk · contribs), and Frostly (talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I see your sandbox for the List of Fiji tropical cyclones is nearly complete. Would you like me to publish it? It is already more substantial than probably anything available online, so even if it isn't complete, it is better to publish and continue working on it in mainspace, so other readers can enjoy the results of your efforts. Good work on the list by the way. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)