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:
Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
FrB.TG , a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
Ceranthor, Numerounovedant, Carbrera, Farang Rak Tham and Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.
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)[reply]
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:
Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with three featured articles
Iazyges, with nine good articles and lots of bonus points
Yashthepunisher, a first time contestant, with two featured lists
SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with seventeen good topic articles
Usernameunique, a first time contestant, with fourteen DYKs
Muboshgu, a seasoned competitor, with three ITNs and
Courcelles, another first time contestant, with twenty-seven GARs
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)[reply]
Thank you for informing me with the issues with my signature, I have corrected it with the fixes you had suggested. — Iunetalk 14:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for updating your signature! (It's usually best to reply on the same user talk page, so I moved your comment here.) —Anomalocaris (talk) 16:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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:
Courcelles, a first time contestant, with 1756 points, a tally built largely on 27 GAs related to the Olympics
Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three GAs on natural history and astronomy topics
SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with a variety of submissions related to transport in the state of Washington
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)[reply]
Would you be able to update the track maps for Cyclone Cook and Cyclone Donna when you get chance, please? They need to show the fact that both systems passed near New Zealand but at the moment they both cut out just below New Caledonia.Jason Rees (talk) 16:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: I'll be happy to do so. I'll try do have them done within the next day or so. :) — Iunetalk 14:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - you may need to use data from Wellington (via IBTRACS or SPEARTC) for them, as the JTWC likes to cut the extratropical stage out.Jason Rees (talk) 19:36, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can you update the season maps for the 2018 Atlantic and Pacific hurricane seasons? I'd really appreciate it, I don't have the software!Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 23:18, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please update the 2018 Pacific hurricane season map. Sorry if it is bwing annoying. Eight days flew by fast! Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
May you please update the Atlantic map, as Ernesto's is cut off early, Florence's doesn't exist and Gordon just formed, so its track does not exist either. Thanks! Cyclone of Foxes (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, could you please update the track for Hurricane How on the 1951 AHS, which includes the general season compilation? Many people would appreciate seeing the northerly track of the storm. Macy2005 (talk) 10:28, 24 October 2021 (UTC)) Sorry if this comment is messy this is my first![reply]
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:
Courcelles scored a magnificent 4869 points, with 92 good articles on Olympics-related themes. Courcelles' bonus points alone exceeded the total score of any of the other contestants!
Kees08 was second with 1155 points, including a high-scoring featured article for Neil Armstrong, two good topics and some Olympics-related good articles.
Cas Liber, with 1066 points, was in third place this round, with two featured articles and a good article, all on natural history topics.
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) 18:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our Champion this year is Courcelles (submissions), who over the course of the competition has amassed 147 GAs, 111 GARs, 9 DYKs, 4 FLs and 1 ITN. Our finalists were as follows:
Zanhe (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 17 in the news articles overall.
Aoba47 (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 43 good article reviews in round 1.
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.
Hello, Iune. 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.
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)[reply]
And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2. With 56 contestants qualifying, each group in Round 2 contains seven contestants, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for Round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining contestants.
Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
L293D, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with ten good articles on submarines for a total of 357 points.
Adam Cuerden, a WikiCup veteran, came next with 274 points, mostly from eight featured pictures, restorations of artwork.
MPJ-DK, a wrestling enthusiast, was in third place with 263 points, garnered from a featured list, five good articles, two DYKs and four GARs.
Usernameunique came next at 243, with a featured article and a good article, both on ancient helmets.
Ed! was also on 224, with an amazing number of good article reviews (56 actually).
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. Between them, contestants completed reviews on 143 good articles, one hundred more than the number of good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Well done all!
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.
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:
Cas Liber (1210), our winner in 2016, with two featured articles and three DYKs. He also made good use of the bonus points available, more than doubling his score by choosing appropriate articles to work on.
Kosack (750), last year's runner up, with an FA, a GA, two FLs, and five DYKs.
Adam Cuerden (480), a WikiCup veteran, with 16 featured pictures, mostly restorations.
Zwerg Nase (461), a seasoned competitor, with a FA, a GA and an ITN item.
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.
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Typhoon 0805. Since you had some involvement with the Typhoon 0805 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. B dash (talk) 09:14, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Typhoon 0715. Since you had some involvement with the Typhoon 0715 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. B dash (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Typhoon 0209. Since you had some involvement with the Typhoon 0209 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. B dash (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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 MeteorologistClement 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.
Since the last newsletter, twelve systems have formed.
Southwest Indian Ocean
In the Southwest Indian Ocean, Cyclone Kenneth made landfall in Mozambique approximately 1 month after Cyclone Idai, causing widespread flooding and destruction. Overall, Kenneth killed at least 52 people and caused more than $100 million in damage. Additionally, Tropical Cyclone Lorna formed over the eastern portion of the basin in late April and dissipated in early May without affecting land.
Australian Region
In the Australian Region, cyclones Lili and Ann formed in early May and both affected land. No deaths were reported, although Lili caused moderate damage in the Maluku Islands and East Timor.
South Pacific
In the South Pacific, a tropical depression formed in mid-may, but failed to intensify and dissipated a few days later.
South Atlantic
In the South Atlantic, Subtropical Storm Jaguar formed in late May and lasted for approximately two days before becoming extratropical.
Western Pacific
In the Western Pacific, three weak tropical depressions existed during the first half of May.
North Atlantic
In the North Atlantic, Subtropical Storm Andrea formed on the same day as Jaguar, but failed to intensify and dissipated on the next day.
The Eastern Pacific hurricane season began on May 15.
The Atlantic hurricane season will begin at 2:00 AM EDT on June 1.
The Central Pacific hurricane season will begin sometime after 12:00 AM HST on June 1.
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!
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!
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.
This section lists content that have become featured, articles and lists, since the past newsletter in mid-April 2019. From April 14–May 31, 2019, 1 featured article was promoted:
An awards program for the project began on May 31. It involves 25 levels that may be gained by earning points for completing various actions such as getting good or featured articles. Additional awards will be added in the future.
As of this news letter, there are more articles ranked a good article or better (1317) than articles ranked B-class or worse (1272), for the first time in the project's history.
Every Atlantic hurricane season from 1945 to 2007 is rated at least a GA. That is an impressive feat, and an incredibly body of work among many editors.
Cyclone Raja became the 150th featured article in the project. Thanks to all of the editors and their tireless edits for writing 2.7% of all of Wikipedia's featured articles.
In the 24 hours after Hurricane Michael's TCR was released, the article on the hurricane was edited 82 times by 18 different users.
In March 2019, the most popular article in the project was Cyclone Idai, viewed 231,969 times during the month. The generic cyclone was 2nd most popular, with 131,080 views. In 3rd place was Hurricane Katrina with 112,283 views. Included in the top 20 were the 2018 and 19 Atlantic hurricane seasons, hurricanes Michael, Florence, Irma, Maria, and Harvey, and the 1896 Cedar Keys hurricane, which was TFA on March 20th.
Tropical cyclones by year - from 2000 to present, there were 2,490 tropical cyclones of various intensity, causing a collective $1 trillion in damage and 200,000 deaths
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. As of this issue, there are 150 featured articles and 69 featured lists. There are 142 A-class articles, but that number is subject to change, depending if we mandate that all A-class articles have an A-class review first. There are 956 good articles, meaning it is possible we get to our 1000th GA by the end of the year. There are only 61 B-class articles, perhaps because because most articles of that quality already passed a GA review. There are 350 C-class articles, 720 start-class articles, and 141 stub-class articles, with 29 lists and 8 current articles. The number of lists may decrease further as the "Tropical cyclone X" articles continue to be reclassified as set index articles. These figures mean that nearly half of the project is rated a GA or better - including the lists/current/future articles, there are 1272 articles that are below GA status, versus 1317 that are GA or better.
WPTC 15th Anniversary push: some goals for the 15th year of WPTC include the creation or improvement of many other articles listed in the first section on the WPTC talk page.
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.
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:
Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with 500 points derived mainly from a featured article and two GAs on natural history topics
Adam Cuerden, with 480 points, a tally built on 16 featured pictures, the result of meticulous restoration work
SounderBruce, a finalist in the last two years, with 306 points from a variety of submissions, mostly related to sport or the State of Washington
Usernameunique, with 305 points derived from a featured article and two GAs on archaeology and related topics
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.
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 June 1–July 31, 2019. This edition's editor and author is ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) .
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.
Hurricane Barry was the wettest tropical storm on record in Arkansas, and one of only four hurricanes to strike Louisiana in July. Originating from a trough over the southeastern United States, Barry formed on July 11 off the southeast Louisiana coast. Despite wind shear and an asymmetrical structure, the storm intensified into a minimal hurricane before making landfall near Intracoastal City, Louisiana. Barry dropped heavy rainfall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Ohio Valley, peaking at 23.43 in (595 mm) near Ragley, Louisiana. The storm caused flooding rains, power outages, and one death due to rip currents. Damage totaled over US$500 million.
The Atlantic hurricane season, and the Central Pacific hurricane season, began on June 1. The 2019-20 tropical cyclone year in the Southern Hemisphere began on July 1 in the South-West Indian Ocean, Australian region, and South Pacific.
Since the last newsletter, 18 other systems have formed worldwide, in addition to Barry.
Western Pacific
In the Western Pacific, Tropical Storm Sepat in June passed near Japan and was classified as a subtropical storm by the JTWC. In early July, Tropical Storm Mun killed two people when it struck Vietnam. Tropical Storm Danas formed near the Philippines and moved northward, later crossing the Korean peninsula. Toward the end of July, Tropical Storm Nari moved across Japan as a tropical depression, and Tropical Storm Wipha struck southern China. There were also three tropical depressions, one of which the JTWC classified as a tropical storm.
Short-lived Tropical Depression Three formed near the Bahamas and dissipated east of Florida in late July
North Indian Ocean
Cyclone Vayu was a powerful cyclone that threatened western India, but stalled and weakened significantly before moving ashore. The storm killed eight people, and lashed western India with heavy rainfall and high tides.
South-West Indian Ocean
In late July, Zone of Disturbed Weather 01 lasted for a few days east of Madagascar in the southern hemisphere winter.
New WikiProject Members since the last newsletter in June/July 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 May 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!
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. As of this issue, there are 152 featured articles and 70 featured lists. There are 142 A-class articles, but that number is subject to change, depending if we mandate that all A-class articles have an A-class review first. There are 961 good articles, meaning it is possible we get to our 1000th GA by the end of the year. There are only 62 B-class articles, perhaps because because most articles of that quality already passed a GA review. There are 363 C-class articles, 717 start-class articles, and 141 stub-class articles, with 26 lists and 9 current articles. The number of lists may decrease further as the "Tropical cyclone X" articles continue to be reclassified as set index articles. These figures mean that more than half of the project is rated a GA or better - including the lists/current/future articles, there are 1283 articles that are below GA status, versus 1325 that are GA or better.
Reports, bulletins, and other products issued by Regional Specialized Meteorological Centers are the authoritative source on meteorological information pertaining to tropical cyclones in their respective basins. This includes both quantitative and qualitative information about a storm's characteristics, including intensities, durations, and locations. The most recent post-storm assessments take precedence over operational data. Thus, post-season revisions to a storm's "best track" file, new information presented in a tropical cyclone report, or official database adjustments made by the Atlantic hurricane reanalysis project, or other official reanalyses supersede operational information where they disagree. Data in operational RSMC products can still be used if later data does not dispute them. Information from other public agencies can also be used, but generally require in-text attribution. While the original best track data from meteorological agencies is a reliable source and can be referenced, readers often find difficulty interpreting them. Consider using IBTrACS, a more easily understandable track database, which is endorsed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), for this information. Because the Automated Tropical Cyclone Forecasting System (ATCF) used by the Joint Typhoon Warning Center and National Hurricane Center is liable to change frequently in realtime, they should not be used for currently active storms. Forecasts from these agencies and RSMCs should only be used to cite the forecasts themselves; in other words, they can only be used to describe what was expected to occur, and never to describe what did occur.
Maps and other graphics published by meteorological agencies may be used to describe events (see the associated essay). However, they should only be referenced if they are explicit in conveying the supported information and do not require any rigorous meteorological interpretation (such as satellite analysis or drawing conclusions over what the arrangement of meteorological features represents). In general, self-published sources should not be used as sources for present or historical storm intensities. However, information contained in articles from reliable sources or commentary from established tropical cyclone experts can be used as sources for information not covered by WMO-endorsed agencies. If such sources dispute WMO-endorsed meteorological data, commentary on the disputed information may be used, making sure to attribute claims and giving due weight.
Storm effects are typically referenced with a wide array of published sources. These may include news organizations, risk assessment organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGO), government agencies, and impact databases. So long as they are reliable sources, they can be used as references for tropical cyclone impacts. Note that figures from early impact reports, often disseminated by the first NGO situation reports and news reports, may quickly be outdated in light of newer information. When sourcing damage totals or casualty figures, use the most recent value from a reliable source, as these values tend to be more stable and use more up-to-date information. If such figures are disputed by other reliable sources, this should be noted in the article, making sure to attribute claims and giving due weight. Routine calculations of damage and casualty figures (for instance, adding casualties from different countries) are acceptable as long as they arise from reliable sources.
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.
The article for hurricane (tropical cyclone) was created on December 2, 2001. On October 3, 2002, User:Ed Poor created an article for Hurricane Lili while the storm was active and near peak intensity; since then, 163 other people have edited the article to help make it a . In March 2004, User:BigT27 created an article for the hyperactive 1995 Atlantic hurricane season, then the 3rd most-active Atlantic hurricane season on record. On August 14 of that year, an article was created for Hurricane Iniki, the first non-Atlantic storm, and on August 31, the 1900 Galveston hurricane became the first TC-related . On October 4, 2004, Cyclone Tracy became featured, which was the 2nd FA in the project. A week later, User:Golbez created the article for 2004 Pacific hurricane season, which was the first season article for the EPAC.
On August 26, 2005, User:CrazyC83 created an article for Hurricane Katrina after the legendary storm crossed over southern Florida. By two days later, there were 500 edits to the article, and the hurricane was threatening to hit New Orleans as a Category 4 or 5. We now know it was “only” a Category 3 at landfall. In the 14 years since Katrina, there have been 6,327 editors to the Hurricane Katrina article, along with 23 sub-articles. During the 2005 season, there were debates among editors whether lesser notable storms, like Hurricane Cindy (2005), should have articles. At one point in 2006, there were articles for every named storm during the 2005 AHS, but in the 13 years since then, articles for tropical storms Franklin, Harvey, and Lee, and Philippe were created and merged. As a way to coordinate edits among the tropical cyclone pages, User:Jdorje created Template:Hurricane on September 12, 2005. This is the same template that appears on the talk pages for every article in the WPTC. On October 5, Jdorje officially created WP:WPTC, the tropical cycloneWikiProject. That October, in quick succession, the Atlantic hurricane seasons reached back to the beginning of recordkeeping (before 1600s) due to a collaboration of several editors; User:RattleMan created the first season article for the North Indian Ocean; User:Miss Madeline successfully nominated List of California hurricanes for featured list; and Jdorje created a a standardized storm path template.
In 2006, a series of users improved articles worldwide to featured article status. Professional met David Roth joined the project, and in the same year, the NOAA and NHC copied some material from Wikipedia, including track maps, and the Tropical Cyclone Report for Tropical Storm Chris (2006). In June 2006, User:Nilfanion created the project assessment page, which documents the status of every article, organized by basin, the year, and storm shaded by the quality. On August 1, the chat room on IRC for the project was created, which allowed real-time communication among editors. There’s something special about conversing with fellow weather geeks during an epic storm, which seems to have become all the more common. On January 1, 2007, the number of good articles in the project reached 100. On January 29th, a collaboration of users made the List of retired Pacific hurricane names the first featured topic in the project. It was joined by the 2003 Atlantic hurricane season in March 2007.
In 2008, further collaborations helped make the article for tropical cyclone a featured article, one of 100 FA’s in the project. Notably among project members, Tropical Storm Erick (2007) became featured on December 14, 2008. The storm lasted for a short amount of time over open waters, and as such, it was the shortest featured article anywhere on Wikipedia. Users questioned whether the storm was notable enough to have such a detailed article, but the article described the storm in articulate detail. After an AFD and two featured article review (and a series of low-notability storms being merged), Erick was delisted as a featured article on March 2, 2013. In the period from 2008 to 2013, users created task forces for various basins, articles for all of the seasons in the Atlantic and EPAC, and enough high-quality articles that more than half of all storm/season articles were good or featured articles. In January 2008, there were 1000 articles in the entire project. On January 1, 2014, User:Yellow Evan created Typhoon Nancy (1982), which was the 2000th article in the project. In October 2008, there were 100 FA’s in the project, which reached 200 on November 28, 2015, with Hurricane Fay (2014). By March 2016, every basin had at least 100 storm articles, multiple featured articles, and season articles of various quality.
Featured Content
This section lists content that have become featured, articles and lists, since the past newsletter in mid-April 2019. From June 1–July 31, 2019, one featured article and one featured list was promoted:
An awards program for the project began on May 31. It involves 25 levels that may be gained by earning points for completing various actions such as getting good or featured articles. Additional awards will be added in the future.
In June 2019, the most popular article in the project was Cyclone Fani, viewed 139,696 times during the month. The generic cyclone was 2nd most popular, with 91,890 views. In 3rd place was the 2019 Atlantic hurricane season with 90,741 views, followed by Hurricane Katrina with 78,591 views. Included in the top 20 were the 2019 season articles for EPAC, WPAC, and NIO, TFA Cyclone Raja, 2018 and 19 Atlantic hurricane seasons, hurricanes Michael, Harvey, Maria, and Sandy. In July 2019, Hurricane Barry (2019) was viewed 85,793 times, with a peak on the day after the storm moved ashore.
WPTC 15th Anniversary push: some goals for the 15th year of WPTC include the creation or improvement of many other articles listed in the first section on the WPTC talk page.
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.
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 CwmhiraethMediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
