Talk:List of California hurricanes

message: Since this article is a list I think it should correctly be called List of California hurricanes.  Or maybe List of California tropical cyclones, since almost all of them were only tropical storms. Jdorje 05:59, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we could actually rename this to list of Western United States tropical cyclones. Some ePac storms affect Arizona without affecting California. Norma in 1970 is an example. They could be added to the list and keep it a featured list. I think that artificially dividing up what could be a long featured list into short ones that are closely related is a cheaty way of increasing their number. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fine.  We can do another rename once the list is expanded.  Though I'm not sure if it should be "List of west coast hurricanes" or "List of United States West Coast hurricanes" or "List of Western United States hurricanes".  (It should be hurricanes, not tropical cyclones, as for instance it is :Category:Florida hurricanes.) Now on a related note, what should the category be: :Category:California hurricanes, or is a larger category desirable? Jdorje 16:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, :Category:Western United States hurricanes is the best name because we don't really need to seperate California and Arizona, right? Hurricane Nora (1997) would be the only one in the Arizona category, and it would also go in the California category. The only difficulties with this idea is the work with renaming :category:California hurricanes and  perhaps possible confusion with :category:Hawaii hurricanes. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 21:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename 

message: I'm unfamiliar with the Notes way of annotating an article, and am using ref as it appears the article had already begun this transition per earlier discussion.  If this is a problem, can someone with the know-how convert either the refs to notes or the notes to refs, to keep it consistent?  Thanks.  Thegreatdr 21:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, converted to <ref>s. Titoxd(?!?) 21:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: What's up with the broken references? Jdorje 20:37, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it... I used  instead of . Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because this is already a featured list, does this mean it is FA class? Hurricanehink 18:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Todo

message: When the page was moved, it caused a problem with the peer review and FA thing at the top. Is there any way to fix it? Hurricanehink 18:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it can be fixed by moving the peer review and FLC. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 20:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, ok. Hurricanehink 20:37, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem 

message: The 1858 San Diego Hurricane was a very rare California hurricane. It is the only known tropical cyclone to impact California as a hurricane, although other systems impacted California as tropical storms.
*and
A California hurricane is a tropical cyclone that affects the state of California. Usually, only the remnants of tropical cyclones affect California. No hurricane has ever made landfall in California in recorded history.
*huh?
tarotcards (talk) 04:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  contradiction 

message: Did Hurricane Greg's remnants impact California? If so, should they be added to this list? 99.35.233.16 (talk) 05:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: AFAIK Hurricane Greg 2011s remnants didnt impact California.Jason Rees (talk) 15:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not 100% sure, but I do not think so. YE  Pacific Hurricane 15:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greg's remnants 

message: This is just an important notice regarding my recent edit of the removal of the 2013 Hurricane/Tropical Storm Kiko. I removed Kiko from the list and I moved it to the List of Arizona hurricanes. There are two main reasons why I did that, and they are related. Firstly, the text said that Kiko fueled the monsoon. There is no such monsoon in California––it is only in Arizona. Secondly, I looked at the reference used, which said that "heavy rain was recorded in Arizona while little or no rain was recorded in California". That supported my claim even more.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.223.175.207 (talk) 21:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important Notice 

message: I added page numbers to the links of the pdf file: "A History of significant weather events in Southern California" so that people don't have to keep scrolling down that reference to find the correct page where the information is located. Could you please check my edits and open the revised links and tell me if you like it better now, or if you liked it better earlier when the link opened like this. You can even call other users and check on their opinions if you have time. Thanks, 73.223.175.207 (talk) 14:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Wiki prefers just having one reference to a single reference not 10 after all we do have the page numbers parameter which can be used to specify specific pages.Jason Rees (talk) 17:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edits look good to me, thanks for adding that! Regarding citing pages in general: if you're referencing a specific page in a large document, a page number is preferable to include for easy verification. In other cases it's not necessary and often left up to personal choice. For a document being used multiple times, there are two ways to go about it: 1) you can cite each page/chapter/section/etc. individually or 2) cite the document as whole and use the "pages=" parameter to identify the pages used. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should page numbers be included in links of pdf files? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on List of California hurricanes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070708223310/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov:80/breakpoints_list.shtml? to http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/breakpoints_list.shtml?
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of California hurricanes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050925163209/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/1997nora.html to http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/1997nora.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006122021/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/2001juliette.html to http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/2001juliette.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/breakpoints_list.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: from http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014AGUFMNH33B3907M sounds like it might be something worth adding? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:36, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to see the entire paper and would be very careful about such so called facts as the TC Database for the EPAC, isnt as well developed as the Atlantic.Jason Rees (talk) 13:17, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the reason why I asked is because it looks more like a conference abstract than something published in a full length form. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:29, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A source worth noting (relative mortality hurricanes / earthquakes) 

message: Since it's the Pacific? 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:F12F:56A6:62BD:E948 (talk) 05:06, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No it should not. ChessEric 04:32, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't it be Cyclone? 

message: A recent IP comment made a valid point about the nomenclature used for this list's title. I initiated this RfC in order to determine whether consensus exists to rename this list.
Options:
# List of California hurricanes, tropical storms, and depressions
#*Pro:
#**Current name is misleading because records only confirm that one hurricane has ever passed through California.
#**All others listed systems were tropical storms, depressions, or remnants thereof.
#*Con:
#**Complicated name.
#**Study of the AMS paper that reported the discovery of the one hurricane to make landfall in California suggests that its conclusion may have been reached by educated guessing rather than firm evidence.
# List of California hurricane remnants
#*Pro:
#**Concisely sums up the various tropical storms, depressions, etc. listed.
#**Makes clear that listed weather phenomena were not hurricanes upon making landfall in California.
#*Con:
#**Unfamiliar name.
#**Some listed systems were remnants of tropical storms and depressions.
#**Needs an explanatory note in the lead or elsewhere in the list explaining that the AMS reported on the recorded existence of one hurricane in 1858. 
# Maintain current name
#*Pro:
#**Familiarity.
#**Most of these listed weather phenomena had originated as hurricanes prior to making landfall in California, which for a wider audience may qualify as a "California hurricane".
#*Con:
#**Misleading name.
#**Only one listed storm qualifies as being a hurricane.
—CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:16, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Maintain current name This title apparently reached consensus in the distant past, CA does have one, and the article is consistent with other US state hurricane articles in covering remnants.  It ain't broke so I don't think it needs fixing. Tom94022 (talk) 21:28, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

text: Please do not use RfCs for move discussions, as stated at WP:RFCNOT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:03, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the list be renamed? 

message: I wanted to have a table with all of the California storms with articles. There's only ten articles left to get this to a good topic, which I think is very doable. There might be a storm here or there missing, but not that many. Looking at the list, Olivia, Nora, and Juliette stand out as among the most important. Also, there already are nine featured articles in this topic, making it 45% complete toward a potential featured topic. Looking at the overlap with what's needed, I could see Olivia/Nora/Juliette being doable to get to FA, especially since Nora once was featured, and I know  has done some work on it. Also, not to advertise, but part of why I'm doing this is that Hurricane Hilary is at FAC right now, which could be a potential 10th FA. Of the remaining storms, Odile was retired, so that would be useful if that was an FA, not sure if its GA nominator  had any interest in that (pinging him anyway). That gets to a potential 12 out of the 20. Of course, that depends how many overall articles there are. Looking at the list, I'm not convinced Hurricane Ramon should have an article, since the 1987 Pacific hurricane season isn't especially long. Similar story with Hurricane Darby (1992), although the 1992 PHS article is on the long side. Not that I'm proposing merging either, just that those two stand out. Another odd one is Melor, the lone typhoon in the list. It only affected California through a storm complex that absorbed its remnant. That's gonna be a tricky topic, perhaps justifying keeping it as two separate articles. But I don't think the Melor article can be completed unless the October 2009 North American storm complex is also a GA. So just some thoughts about Cali hurricanes. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk)  23:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long term featured/good topic