Talk:Lists of Atlantic hurricanes

message: I wasn't sure to call if list of notable Atlantic hurricanes or this, so hope this fine. Hurricanehink 20:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: OK, that section is a little long. Is there really a need to list every hurricane/tropical storm that affected Canada, when we have a category for that already? I say we only list those that have articles for their destruction in Canada; Newfoundland Hurricane of 1775, Nova Scotia Cyclone of 1873, 1869 Saxby Gale, 1959 Escuminac Disaster, and Hurricane Juan. The actual list only includes Juan, while these 5 are much more worthy, IMO. Remove that list and put only the truly notable. Otherwise, the list would be way to long. Hurricanehink 14:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: List should be removed - hurricanes are not unusual in Canada. CrazyC83 18:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Got it. Hurricanehink 18:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unusual landfalls- Canada

message: This is also semi-off-topic.  What about a list of the costliest U.S. hurricanes of all time?  That is, a list of hurricanes, each of which was the costliest U.S. hurricane of all time?  Numbers must be adjusted for inflation of course, and naturally they go in reverse chronological order.  Here is an incomplete list (others may be filled in in the middle or end).  What I would find interesting would be to try to take this back to, say, 1492 (except for that, we should drop the "U.S." bit, but that will require a lot more research). Jdorje 01:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Might be hard to get old ones. Normally they only have death tolls with one location having a damage estimage. Hurricanehink 01:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You forgot Charley. 2nd costliest of its time. 3rd now. 152.163.100.14 00:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fourth, actually - Wilma is third. B.Wind 23:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costliest U.S. hurricanes of all time 

message: Here's another chart that should be created. I'll try to work on it. Note that most of these are estimated (infobox medians or best guesses based on descriptions); exact numbers are difficult to find for most countries. CrazyC83 04:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On a related note, it is a major problem that hurricane articles do not have good explanation of damages in other countries.  Many storms do not list those damages at all, or make it clear that the damages they list is US-only.  Other storms list those damages, but none of them that I've seen give any sources. Jdorje 04:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added Iniki and Mireille. I do assume that it is worldwide, and not just Atlantic. Hurricanehink 01:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no, this is still just Atlantic, otherwise it gets ridiculous.  Did you know there was a tc in bangladesh that left 10 million people homeless? Jdorje 02:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, OK. My bad. Hurricanehink 02:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Are you talking about the 1970 Bhola hurricane? juan andrés 06:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I've never seen homelessness stats for the 1970 Bhola cyclone - although it did cause a civil war which led to a war between india and pakistan, which is even more insane.  I mean the 1991 Bangladesh cyclone which was by all accounts worse than the 1970 one...except this time they knew it was coming and evacuated 2 million people, so fatalities were "minimized" to 150,000. Jdorje 06:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costliest hurricanes of all-time: all countries 

message: Everyone says Ivan was the lowest latitude a hurricane ever reached major hurricane status (9.6 degrees north). I don't know... Hurricane Ekeka in the pacific hung dangeoruosly close to the 9 degree mark to make a call like that. Any one agree with me? Or am I just seeing things?
 <-- Ekeka track   <--- Ivan track    Cyclone1 01:59, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The record would have to be for Atlantic hurricanes. — jdorje (talk) 03:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, didn't think of that. Cyclone1 04:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lowest Major hurricane Ivan? 

message: I noticed somebody changed the bg color on the 1991 halloween noreaster from category one to tropical depression. Thanks to whoever did that. Cyclone1 02:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks to Whoever 

message: I verified and expanded #Listed by number of tornadoes spawned shortly before this article was split from the global one. All hurricanes before 1992 are authoritatively sourced by: Grazulis, Thomas P. (1993). Significant Tornadoes 1680-1991, A Chronology and Analysis of Events. The Tornado Project of Environmental Films: St. Johsnbury, VT.  . Events sources as NHC or NWS have been verified but are from random statements and not a single citable page. There will be discrepencies on numbers from all time periods, my suggestion is to use the Grazulis numbers (exhausative) for through 1991, and for the last few years and for the future, if NHC puts out a number, to use that. When unavailable, various NWS statements and research papers would be suitable, as well as any listings that may be found. Evolauxia 10:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Use  for your references.  Also, the Hugo article claims 3,000 embedded tornadoes (the source is a politician, not the meteorologists); what does the book have to say about that one? — jdorje (talk) 18:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. It lists three, with none significant (F2-F5 or killer), in the Carolinas (ch 11, pp 124-7). I could start an article on tropical cyclone tornadoes, there would be plenty of material on their meteorology since they're distinct from typical supercell tornadoes and waterspouts/landspouts. Some discussion of history and a listing of all tropical cyclones with tornadoes would fill it out nicely. What would be an appropriate name for such an article? Evolauxia 23:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about History of Tropical Cyclone spawned tornadoes? This would be an interesting topic. Hurricanehink 00:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would work well. We could start with that article, modeled after the current TC lists with maybe more elaboration on some events. That article then would be left to expand at will without cluttering an eventual article on tropical cyclone tornado meteorology and such. Evolauxia 04:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone know of the first TC spanwed tornado? Hurricanehink 12:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since 1851? Good luck finding that! Cyclone1 16:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for tornadoes spawned 

message: Another bit of trivia here.  This is a list of the strongest/most northerly hurricanes to hit the U.S. east coast.  Each hurricane is stronger than any that struck north of it.  The easiest source for this is http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pastint.shtml.  A secondary, more complete source is http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/ushurrlist.htm. — jdorje (talk) 01:13, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off-topic: Most northerly U.S. hurricanes 

message: As it formed over land, should it be added to Unusual Landfalls:West Africa? Jamie|C  15:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. It didn't actually make landfall. Maybe under extreme latitudes? Hurricanehink 17:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Delta didnt make landfall either.  Christine was tropical when it was over land.  Perhaps not a landfall, but notable enough for mention IMO. Jamie|C  19:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Delta did make landfall as an extratropical storm. Hurricanehink 22:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So is the definition of landfall "to pass from ocean to land" or "to be on land"?  If it's the second one, then Christine should definately be mentioned. Jamie|C  22:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would guess it is to pass from ocean to land. The best place for this, IMO, is under the extreme latitudes section. Hurricanehink 22:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should definately go in the extreme latitudes section, but I think also should be at least mentioned in the African landfalls section. Jamie|C  23:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about something along the lines of "Christine did not technically make landfall in Africa, but it did form over this area"? Jamie|C  19:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christine '73 

message: I just thought I'd mention this coincidence. In the past, whenever a major New England hurricane occurred, another one would happen 6 years later. Here are some 6 year twins.
*Great September Gale of 1815/1821 Norfolk and Long Island Hurricane
*New England Hurricane of 1938/1944 Great Atlantic Hurricane
*Hurricane Carol&Hurricane Edna (1954)/Hurricane Donna (it did cause major damage in New England)
*Hurricane Gloria/Hurricane Bob
Hurricanehink 15:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty intresting actually. Nice Research Cyclone1 22:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mind if i use this in my Tropical Cyclone Coincidences user-subpage? Cyclone1 20:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, go for it. Hurricanehink 21:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I felt it right to ask first. Cyclone1 17:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New England's 6 year curse? 

message: There is an extreme latitudes section, but not an extreme longtitude section.  Should longtidute be added to the existing section, or should a new section be made? Jamie|C  21:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In Talk:Hurricane Vince (2005) is a list of most-northerly and most-easterly and most-northeasterly-forming storms. — jdorje (talk) 22:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So should a similar table to this page? Jamie|C  18:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you like.  Do you want a table for each of the 8 directions? — jdorje (talk) 19:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be helpful, where would I find one?  And also is there a record for furthest West and Southwest?  would it go to one of the crossovers? Jamie|C  19:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The tables can be built from http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/Data_Storm.html.  One could potentially have a nearly unlimited number of tables (and thus records) - for most extreme formation (in each of the 8 directions) of tropical depressions, tropical storms (the default), hurricanes, and major hurricanes - that's 32 tables right there.  And before you go talking about how most of those tables are unnecessary, just look at the current section in the article which, though incomplete, covers just about the entire spectrum of those records.  Finally, most westerly and southwesterly (and maybe northwesterly) formations would go to storms that formed right on the coast; for instance, the most westerly formation (through 2004) is 1984_Atlantic_hurricane_season#Tropical_Storm_Edouard. — jdorje (talk) 19:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks.  Are the records from the 1800s reliable though?  Hurricane 1 for the most West formation doesnt seem desperately reliable.  Also, should any of the 2005 storms be on that chart? Jamie|C  15:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are all just estimates.  That shouldn't throw you off though - even for modern storms, all the positions, pressures, and windspeeds are estimates.  In fact the older storms (1851-1890) may be more accurate than some of the newer ones (1920-1980) since the older ones were re-analyzed just a year or two ago, whereas the later ones were re-analyzed nearly a decade ago or, in some cases, may not have been re-analyzed at all yet.  All data is subject to future revisions, and I'm hoping for some pretty hefty changes this year. — jdorje (talk) 18:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lat. and Long. 

message: Hey, whats with the gap in the retired names table? Just an accident? Ive never noticed it before... Cyclone1 22:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because of Gracie...see Talk:List of retired Atlantic hurricanes. — jdorje (talk) 22:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What? Gracie wasn't retired?!? Huh? That's messed up! Err was it? AHH! I'm so confused! Gracie was bad! Bad! I coulda sworn she was retired!!! Cyclone1 22:02, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question...

message: Dude, jdorje, you really improved the fastest forward speed list. No offense to who made it but the first one in the List of notable tropical cyclones was kinda unorganized and unreliable. Cyclone1 03:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I encourage everyone to use the best track data (http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/Data_Storm.html) to improve the verifiability of the information in this article. — jdorje (talk) 09:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Way to go, man!

message: So should the Unnamed Storm of 2005 be included to landfalling storms on the Azores? tdwuhs
:Yes. Hurricanehink 21:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landfalls 

message: Now that i have your attention, I have a question... should Joan be added to the longest lasting section? It lasted 22 days if you count Miriam. Technically they were the same storm. 
Sorry about the Alert thing. No one would have paid attention other wise. →Cyclone1→ 19:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, though interesting point. I would vote no for longest Atlantic, though it could work for worldwide. Miriam wasn't part of the Atlantic. Hurricanehink 19:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So, should I add it for longest lasting in the notable cyclones page? →Cyclone1→ 20:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, currently there's no TC longevity extremes section, but if one were made, then it could be added. Hurricanehink 21:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? Hmm, coulda sworn there was one. Oh well, I aint makin it. LOL. How bout we just say below the longevity list on this page that joan-miriam as a singular tropical cyclone lasted 22 days, but they were in two different basins? →Cyclone1→ 22:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe. Anyone else? Hurricanehink 01:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: C'mon peeps! Speak up! →Cyclone1→ 17:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Only the Atlantic portion should be counted for this page.  A footnote can be added.  Just like C-D on List of retired Atlantic hurricanes. — jdorje (talk) 21:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll do that. →Cyclone1→ 00:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joan-Miriam 

message: Can we merge that article in already?  These two articles cover the exact same topics.  They each just list notable storms, and the records they hold. — jdorje (talk) 03:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Hurricanehink 11:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Atlantic hurricane records]]

message: No major hurricanes listed are here from 1861 to 1865, but there must have been some effect on combat. Does anyone know?
:... Ican't figure out what you trying to say. →Cyclone1→ 22:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Expedition hurricane of November of 1861, while not a major hurricane, was a minor hurricane that affected a Union fleet trying to attack the Confederacy. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Civil War 

message: The New England Hurricane of 1938 article insists that "its forward speed approached 70 mph".  Why is it not on this list?  I know that some sources list it as extratropical when it impacts New England, but nothing I've found has been consistant. -Runningonbrains 13:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's my big question too, on reading this page.  It's listed everywhere as a hurricane, it's extremely notable for its forward speed since unlike most of the others it had that speed at landfall, so if it's not on the list there should be a really good reason. --Xkcd 01:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fastest forward speed 

message: ...should technically not be on this page.  While it should be here in the spirit of the page, Catarina was not a hurricane, but a cyclone, per Southern Hemisphere naming conventions.  I hate to play devil's advocate like this, and I would like to hear what others have to say. -Runningonbrains 10:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we also list 2001's Allison here even though it wasn't a hurricane. To be fair, Catarina never was an official storm by any means, and definitely not a hurricane. I'd support removing it from this list. – Chacor 10:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be mentioned somewhere. We could move the South Atlantic basin from the List of notable tropical cyclones into this article, and change North and South Atlantic basin to just Atlantic basin. I think Catarina should be mentioned, though it should be carefully stated like "A cyclone unofficially named Catarina struck Brazil after forming in the South Atlantic Ocean. Its status is unknown, though meteorologists consider it the first known tropical cyclone in the South Atlantic to have winds exceeding 64 knots (74 mph, metric)." Hurricanehink (talk) 23:23, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cyclone Catarina]] 

message: As it is, I don't think there is a good chance for this ever passing FLC, as notable is a bit POV and very vague. However, might it be better changing it to a List of Atlantic hurricane records sort of page? That is a lot more defined, and several of the categories here could stay. Hurricanehink (talk) 02:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing as the page was moved, I think it should be thought about again. The current title of List of Atlantic hurricanes is completely wrong, as no one ever attempted on this page to list every Atlantic hurricane. I'm going to bring this up on the WPTC talk page, as well, as something should be done. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A change in plan? 

message: Coz I'm doing a report  on hurricanes.Sooo, sorry if I'm bothering people here.. I'll be asking a few questions on this topic. I'm home schooled. I believe everyone here goes to school? Anyways, please reply as soon as you read this k? Koge donboKoge donbo (talk) 13:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In the global sense, a cyclone is a low pressure area in which winds spiral into the center. A tropical cyclone is a specific type of cyclone, which has a warm thermal core and organized convection. When a tropical cyclone attains winds of 74 mph, it is classified as a hurricane in the Atlantic and eastern Pacific Ocean, or in the North Indian Ocean, they are classified as a cyclone. There is much more information on the subject at tropical cyclone. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Whats the difference between a cyclone and a hurricane?

message: Has any extratropical storms made landfall or even left some effects on this Island? Alberto (2000) got close.Mitchazenia(8600+edits) 19:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This looks odd, one extratropical cyclone got farther north than Hudson Bay. Wouldn't that be a world record? And the only tropical cyclone to get close to Nunavut. If you're confused its the farthest one north on Greenland's west side.Mitchazenia(8600+edits) 20:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about purely tropical storms? CrazyC83 17:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The closest was Hurricane Erin in 2001, which passed over Greenland about 24 hours after becoming extratropical. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greenland 

message: I was looking at the earliest formation by storm number list, and shouldn't Stan be at number 19 rather than previous record holder at number 18 to a storm from the same season?  Also, Earliest by catagory is a duplicate of earliest from the "Earliest/Latest Formations for Each Category" section. Jelloman 14:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earliest Formation 

message: I made a few changes to the page where Subtropical Storm Alpha (1972) was listed as the first storm named after a Greek letter.  This is incorrect, as subtropical storms were named after the phonetic alphabet at this time.  Besides STS Alpha in 1972, STD Bravo (which became Hurricane Betty), STS Charlie, and STS Delta formed that year... all four named from the phonetic alphabet.  2005's TS Alpha (followed by Beta, Gamma, Delta, Epsilon, and Zeta) came from the Greek Alphabet.  Hopefully this clears up this confusion. Senorpepr 15:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek letter vs Phonetic letter 

message: I'm really trying to envision why the year 1965 was chosen as a break for the "years of least storms" lists using some meteorological basis.  It's not even consistent with the "years of most storms" list, which goes back to 1878.  I only event I'm aware of which happenned in 1965 was unknown to the meteorological community at large for another couple decades.  It would have been a defining moment, if known to NHC at the time, which is not clear.  If something else important happenned in 1965 that changed the face of tropical cyclone observation, please correct me and add it to the tropical cyclone observation page.  Here are a list of years that could be used as a more meaningful break, and have some well-known-to-the-whole-meteorological-community observational change to base it upon.
*1943  First year reconnaissance was used for an Atlantic hurricane
*1944  First year weather radar depicted an Atlantic hurricane and first full year of aircraft reconaissance.  Currently considered the first year of reliable records in a number of published papers, including Gray'''
*1954  First year a rocket viewed a tropical cyclone, or its remains, from space
*1957  First year of the United States' radar fence
*1960  First year of polar orbiter satellite coverage
*1965  First year of high resolution polar orbiter satellite coverage (DMSP).  It was not used operationally by non-military meteorologists until at least 1972.  This is the problem with using 1965.  While it is a milestone, as far as I know, the old imagery has not yet been used to refine HURDAT.
*1966  First year of geostationary satellite coverge
*1987  First year of satellites with microwave imagers (I think).  Quikscat was not the first.
*1995  First year of high resolution geostationary satellite coverage.  Wilma's eye would not have been initially visible using older geostationary satellites.
*1997  First year of Quikscat.  Appears to have paved the way for an increased amount of marginal tropical storms to make HURDAT.
The early 1980's have a number of cases which may be added to HURDAT (oh yes, including 1983), a couple of which have supporting recon data.  =O  The changes in 1995-1997 may have exaggerated the tropical cyclone numerical upturn seen since the mid-1990s in the Atlantic basin.  There could be inaccuracies even in more recent years, depending on what your definition of tropical cyclone is.  The tropical gale center which followed Lee, before absorbing Lee and somehow becoming Lee in 2005, is a case in point.    Thegreatdr 23:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The dates could be changed. The FAQ, an easy-at-hand source [says http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/E10.html Here] "both Neumann et al. (1993) and Landsea (1993) recommend utilizing data since 1944 for computing climatological statistics". This would make 1944 reliable for Atlantic. The Eastern North Pacific has "Reliable records go back in this basin to around 1966 when geostationary satellite coverage began." The Western North Pacific has "Reliable records for this basin begin around 1960." There's nothing specific for the southern hemisphere, but the first table starts at 1968-69. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good find. I suppose that works, but like David said it is easily debatable. Chris Landsea in this paper estimates there was an average of 1 more storm per season than recorded, up through the 1990s. Not sure about EPAC, tho. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The CPC says that "Reliable tropical storm and hurricane data for the tropical eastern North Pacific began in 1971. So, yes, it is debatable. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracy prior to 1965? 

message: Per precedent on this page, I have removed the New Jersey and Virginia headings under the unusual landfalls section. Though these states have a short coastline, landfall in this region is not unusual. The general consensus seems to be that unusual landfalls are decided by a place's unusual latitude or longitude, not the arbitrary length of its coastline. Ua747sp 07:44, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unusual Landfalls - United States 

message: This NHC source covers all US hurricanes up to 2006. — jdorje (talk) 05:36, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice source 

message: I know you wrote Humberto set a record for fastest declared depression to hurricane. But I heard it just beat all other storms "within 18 hours of landfall"? -Winter123 00:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The latter is correct (based on NHC wording), though I'm not sure where the former is used. However, given how quickly it strengthened, it could be found in post-analysis that it did indeed achieve the former (maybe for a certain time period). Time will tell (whenever the TCR comes out). Hurricanehink (talk) 00:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intensification? 

message: Why is the link to Tropical Storm Allison in the retired names box green? -- §HurricaneERICarchive 21:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone completely changed the template a few days ago. I personally don't really like it, and I would prefer to how it was before. Here is the EPAC retired template -  - which is what I based the Atlantic one off of. Here's the new retired Atlantic one -  - and here's the way it used to be - . The new one seems bigger and too robotic, and I guess I prefer seeing it centered with a pic on the top right. But to answer your question, the user who changed the template probably felt that Allison should be differentiated since it was a tropical storm, hence them making it green. Hurricanehink (talk) 23:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just curious 

message: From the Hurricane Dean report just released today: "This well-monitored hurricane illustrates some of the pitfalls of using central pressure as a proxy or measure of tropical cyclone intensity." The more I research these amazing systems, the more I agree. Central pressure, while impressive in its own way, is not representative of a storm's true intensity. Andrew had a 922 pressure and was incredibly powerful and destructive. Opal was 25 mph weaker than Andrew at peak intensity but had a 916 pressure, 6 mbar lower than Andrew. Hurricanes Camille and Allen both had the exact same wind speed as Typhoon Tip, Camille maybe higher, but who's regarded as the world's strongest? Reconaissance planes measured surface winds very near 200 mph in Camille, yet it is only the seventh strongest Atlantic storm? If intensity is a measure of a storm's destructive power, then central pressure doesn't cut it. It's a good tiebreaker, but wind speed should decide the final rankings. One of the reasons it's not is that it's inspecific. In terms of raw destructive power, Camille is probably on top and could easily challenge some of the West Pacific's greats. I feel this should be discussed here because it pertains to the rankings in this article. -- §HurricaneERICarchive 22:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Central Pressure appears to be falling out of favor 

message: Irene is in the duration table as 18 days. But she "developed into Tropical Depression Nine on the afternoon of August 4" and "became extratropical on August 18". So should be 14? Drop from table or change to 14? (There could be other storms lasting between 14 and 18 days.) Should the duration table have a few dots then list Bertha as longest duration pre August TC? crandles (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Right you are. Irene did not deserve to be in the table, and to be easiest we should keep it at 18 days. We could include Bertha, for monthly records, but I'm inclined to keep the list to just overall longest. After all, Bertha already has its records in its article. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irene Duration 

message: Do these go Atlantic to Pacific or vice versa or some each way? The table should give some indication. Rmhermen (talk) 19:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Atlantic-Eastern Pacific crossover storms

message: While reading up on this article, I found two strange pieces of information. In the Earliest formation records section, it reads "Joshua is awesome", and under the Naming section, it reads "joshua is my bro". Both were written by 76.100.49.205. I have removed the useless information, if anyone wants to discuss this, please do so. Kael-kun (talk to me?) 21:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What's there to discuss? Good work! Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 00:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joshua? 

message: For anyone who cares, I took the necessary move to convert this to a dab. The majority of the content was placed into List of Atlantic hurricane records, with List of costliest Atlantic hurricanes and List of Atlantic-Pacific crossover hurricanes. Send hate mails here. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case a vast amount of work is needed to fix all the links in each article (particularly see-also) to go to the correct sub-page. — jdorje (talk) 01:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATTENTION!  

message: What are we? Chopped Liver?
Florida and Texas aren't the only states that periodically get waxed by hurricanes.
The LA/MS Gulf Coast hasn't completely recovered from Katrina.
The human and economic damage that hurricanes do to these states can't be understated.
They devastate princes and paupers alike as is evidenced by a photograph of what used to be Senator Trent Lott (R, Miss. retired) house in Pascagoula, MS.
After Katrina hit, the national media made it sound like New Orleans was where the real damage was and Mississippi had a few trees down. The truth is we had whole towns wiped off the map.
Image:2005_1026katrina0019.JPG|Senator Trent Lott's former home
Photo by Author ~60 days after Katrina
Jamessavik (talk) 06:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold! Assemble one (or all) of these lists on your own. ––bender235 (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, I know how you feel.  Not sure why they have entries for NC and MD, but none for VA.  But I don't have the knowledge to set it up myself.  Oh, well.  FideliaE (talk) 12:51, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana?