# Talk:Tropical Storm Alma

At the very least, storm 10 of 1949 did so.  Paul in 1982 did so as a TD in southern Mexico, depending on where you think Central America lies.  There are others that have as well.  The mistake surprises me.  Some of the issue might lie in the fact that Atlantic Storm 10 of 1949 (which apparently killed 40000 people and appears to be the most deadly tropical cyclone impact in the history of the western hemisphere) is not listed in the eastern Pacific database.  I've e-mailed Eric Blake about it, since he's also involved in the reanalysis of the eastern Pacific version of HURDAT.  Thegreatdr (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The article never said that Alma was the first tropical cyclone to strike Central America from the Pacific side; it only said first TS, which was based on the NHC discussion. However, given the example you provided, I'm fine with having that removed. Let us know what you find out. Also, a user mentioned on my talk page that Simone in 1968 made landfall in Central America as a tropical storm, so clearly the NHC didn't do their research. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I mentioned Hattie/Simone/Inga (1961) to Eric as well.  My guess is that they don't consider southern Mexico as central America.  Thegreatdr (talk) 22:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
What about Aridan? That made landfall as a hurricane,right. what about Barbara?

They probably the first TS to strike Nicaragua.----Irdicent 23 20:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

[1]. Shall we list these are direct deaths or indirect deaths, or wait? Hurricane Angel Saki My own personal NHC 03:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Based on the description, they would be best classified as indirect deaths. Alma's rain appeared to be responsible but it did not happen as a direct result of the storm. CrazyC83 (talk) 03:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The remnants of Tropical Strom Alma became Tropical Storm Arthur in the Western Caribbean Sea. I will be noting this.--Lionheart Omega (talk) 18:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[2] 3 dead in Nicaragua, 10 missing.
[3] Possibly another source to back the former up. A girl died near the border, and two people were killed by power lines.
[4] Death toll from the plane crash up to 7.
[5] No reference of the girl, but mentions the two electrocutions and a death in a car crash.
(Just adding more news. I mostly work on the older articles, plus my current events editting is kind of bleh.)
Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 19:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Why don't we merge the two systems (Alma and Arthur) together? Do they not belong in one article? Weatherlover819 (talk) 09:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

That's a good question. I personally don't think so, Alma wasn't really the same system, but just a supplier of tropical convection. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 12:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
No.  Alma dissipated over Central America, then its remnants combined with a monsoon trough created Arthur. -CWY2190(talk • contributions) 12:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
This should accaly be merged into Hurricane Alma-Arthur--Yellow Evan (talk) 20:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

No, it was not the same storm. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Not again, could someone please upload a better track map for Alma? Storm05 (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Available here. Oh, and they're using our track map... Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:14, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

There's a wikitag of some sort we can add to the talk page because of that, isn't there?  Thegreatdr (talk) 22:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
That would be {{Notable Citation}}. -- RattleMan 23:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Something some of the articles in WPAC have and i thought I might introduce it here. Itfc+canes=me (talk) 18:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you think Alma is going to get retired?  The WMO tends to retired these type of storms. The death toll was also a little high. Leave Message orYellow Evan home 13:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Not a chance. Alma was  a minor storm, a death toll of 9 and damage of $33 mill wont get a storm retired, esp one that hit honduras/nicaragua. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
...And, Alma is retired. I'm confused, too. 130.64.137.177 (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Link, please? –Juliancolton | Talk 23:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd heard that too.  Is the WMO meeting report out yet?  Thegreatdr (talk) 01:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

The NHC have just updated their website and Alma is history Jason Rees (talk) 01:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Why was it retired? Just because it was notable in formation and landfall? Did Nicaragua request it? Why? 76.235.197.175 (talk) 01:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hurricane Olivia beats this record, as it formed at 85.2W. Potapych (talk) 21:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Olivia is a continuation of Irene, it formed in the Atlantic. Hurricane Typhoon Cyclone 21:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

That's not what the article says. It's currently original research (since it is not backed up by any citations). Potapych (talk) 21:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
It's supported by the best track, as the last points of Irene's track are the first of Olivia's. Plus, NOAA confirms Irene-Olivia. I think it's fairly obvious was the continuation of an Atlantic cyclone, for the sole reason if it existing over land during its first few points. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps the passage could reworded as "the farthest east a native eastern pacific tropical cyclone has formed."  That is, unless the October 1949 system (in the Atlantic HURDAT) beat it.  =)  Thegreatdr (talk) 01:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It says in the article that "Alma is the third tropical storm in the Eastern Pacific to be retired after Hazel of 1965 and Knut of 1987". I don't think those two storms count as retired names; they were removed from the list for unknown reasons. Alma is the 1st tropical storm in the East Pac. to be retired, not removed for unknown reasons. Does anyone else agree about this? Was Alma the 1st one? 76.235.197.175 (talk) 22:01, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed completely; I've temporarily commented out the sentence in question, pending further investigation. –Juliancolton | Talk 04:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
How about Kenna?  I think that was retired on its own merit.  Thegreatdr (talk) 05:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Kenna was retired due to its damage, AFAIK. –Juliancolton | Talk 06:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
The source (which is an official WMO document) says they were retired and it gives the years. There is no source yet that says Alma was retired. The reference that was given twice links to the lists of names at the NHC website. I do agree the whole thing should be removed, or at least commented out. It seems like people are making up records, or putting a lot of their assumptions in the article, which would be WP:OR. Potapych (talk) 12:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
The reference that shows Gustav, Ike, and Paloma doesn't show Alma on the Pacific list; it just says Amanda, Boris, Cristina, ect, but it doesn't really say anything about the names being retired, so I'm questioning that. Then again, I might be wrong; Alma probrably was retired, and so were the others in the Atlantic. 76.235.197.175 (talk) 16:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
NHC recently posted a news article on Gustav, Ike, Paloma, and Alma. Alma, according to the article, was "retired", not "removed". Thus, I think this ends the discussion. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090501_names.html Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Also see here: "A committee voted to retire them because the storms caused such heavy damage." –Juliancolton | Talk 22:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
What? Alma only did 33 million dollars in damage, and that isn't bad at all, even by Nicaragua's standards. East Pac. retirements occur once in a while, and we will never know what names will be retired. Kenna of 2002 caused only 101 million in damage, and that wasn't bad back then or by Mexico's standards. Nontheless, it was retired so it was the 1st tropical storm to be retired in the Eastern Pacific basin, and that should be mentioned. 76.235.197.175 (talk) 23:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tropical Storm Alma (2008)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
This article appears to be in very good shape, so I've submitted it for GA class.  Thegreatdr (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I withdrew the GA nomination, as the article is still fairly current. There is still more information coming in, a lot, and the article will be changed in the near future. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:41, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Does it hold the record of being the shortest living tropical cyclone to be retired? Or only in Epac. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 03:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

That's a pretty trivial record. We wouldn't make the distinction for Hurricane Ivan that it was the longest lasting Atlantic name to get retired. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it's an interesting stat, actually. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:29, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it's just putting too much emphasis on something as arbitrary as human naming. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Being retired (especially for a tropical storm) is a fairly substantial feat, so it's not arbitrary at all in my opinion. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:51, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
It's just a human-applied naming phenomena, which is totally arbitrary. If there was another similar storm that did the exact same thing, but wasn't retired (or wasn't named), that storm should be no less notable. What's important in its retirement is where it caused the damage and how much it did. Like I said, we wouldn't make the distinction of Hurricane Ivan being the longest-lasting Atlantic name to get retired. We just say the other important records. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 13:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Why wouldn't we say that...? Seems perfectly valid. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
<--Question. Even though it was never a tropical storm and wasn't upgraded as such, what if the May 2004 tropical wave was a tropical cyclone? It killed 2,000 as such in the Dominican Republic (see the Hurricane Ernesto (2006) talk page). Or what if T.D. 11 in 1999 had attained tropical storm intensity? That depression killed nearly 400. The fact is, tropical storm names are subject to human error. We may have little to no idea whether a storm in the deep tropics organized and strengthened enough for a name, and even if we did, it's still a crapshoot. The reason I don't think Alma's longevity should be noted is that, just saying, a more devastating storm may have hit Mexico or Central America and would have been retired, but because of bad organization or little data, it never had a name, meaning there's no name to retire. It may have never happened, but it's still possible. Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 03:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Those storms weren't named/retired, though; we have to go by the facts. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
What's so important about retirement, though? What's more important is what the storm did. Angel Saki is right, in that there are many other more significant tropical cyclones that weren't retired. Are storms in the NIO or SWIO any less important because there isn't a neat list of retired storms in those basins? Of course not. We don't have to list information that's trivial (like Alma being the short-lived retired EPAC storm), as that is making the info more important than it actually is. After all, the NOAA didn't put any unusual emphasis on it being the shortest-lived retired Pacific storm, so we shouldn't either. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
It's not that important about retirement, TD 16 caused more death than Fay, Paul alone killed more than Hazel and was not retired. I think it's getting a little bit off topic so how about putting comments in the project page. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 17:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree, depressions usually gets devastation when they hit land than tropical storms, maybe due to lack of evacuation? Hurricane Paul is an example. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 04:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Tropical Storm Alma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090401144401/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov:80/tracks1949to2008_epa.txt to http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/tracks1949to2008_epa.txt
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)