Talk:2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics

message: I suggest that the link to the ACE article be from the paragraph that follows the ACE section, rather than the section's title itself.  This appears to me as a more elegant way of linking to articles, and perhaps it is already a wiki convention (or else, I'd argue it should be). --BenG 23:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to clarify, I meant the link should be from the first paragraph of the ACE section. --BenG 23:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is a style guideline already, so I'll go ahead and switch it. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 23:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. --BenG 23:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to ACE 

message: 3 Category 5 hurricanes versus the previous record of 2 is a case of beating the previous record by 50%. Pretty impressive!
But are there other records that have been beaten by a higher percentage? I am wondering about the number of 6 hourly tropical advisaries after the season has ended. There is 29 or 30 for Epsilon (does the season end just after 30 Nov 23:59:59 UTC time?) and 26 or 27 for Zeta. What was the record before the 2005 season? crandles 15:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lili had 47. So that record is only beaten by 17-21%. crandles 15:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Costiest hurricane/season $75Bn vs S43.7Bn = beaten record by ~72%. I missed that, guess I was partly thinking about whether the record provide any significant evidence of a global warming impact and for that you don't want a noisy signal. crandles 16:17, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: $75bn+ is just Katrina. Wilma was $14.4bn, Rita $9.4bn, Dennis "$4-6bn" and Ophelia $1.6bn, so the season is over $100bn. - Cuivienen 23:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So the cost record is beaten by 55 billion, and the storms record is beaten by 6.  55 billion > 6. Jdorje 23:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an apple/oranges kinda argument there. 70.177.68.209 00:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to convert to percentage because only then are the units comparable.  You can't compare dollars to hurricanes to kt^2/1000. -PK9 00:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another possibility that might be more interesting is the number of standard deviations further from the norm the current record is compared to the previous record. This might deal with how noisy the information is. Unfortunately, I don't think I want to do all the calculations. crandles 16:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was joking.  However, my point is that even converting to percentage does not allow comparisons across units, because not all values are counted incrementally.  Is a decrease of 6 millibars for maximum storm strength a difference of 0.675% or 4.8% or 50% or 150%?  Does making a percentage out of such a value even make sense? Jdorje 06:22, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

text: For the Tropical Advisories-79/87 for Alberto (2000).HurricaneCraze32 17:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which record has been broken by the biggest margin? 

message: The tables in this article are incomplete without metric (especially the big table of storms). Jdorje 17:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I counsel against that for now.  There is no room for more data in that table as-is.  Perhaps if the storm strength column got set back to just being a number or "TS" and "TD", that would help.  (If there is a consensus for that change I will gladly do it BTW.)  Another idea is to split the table into a storms/maximum-intensity table and a storms/landfall-and-damage table.  This second idea is viable because of the templating currently used to construct the tables.  However, adding related representations of the data (such as knots and km/hr for wind speeds; and in. Hg for pressure) will be grunt work.  In any case, a consensus for doing such a revision and of what if should look like would be appreciated. --EMS | Talk 17:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Metric is essential.  If that means the table has to be split, then so be it. Jdorje 17:59, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metric 

message: Since Gamma briefly reached tropical storm strength south of Hispaniola, shouldn't it have a higher ACE value?Icelandic Hurricane 22:06, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was already adjusted upwards from 1.05 to 1.33. --AySz88^-^ 01:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gamma's ACE

message: Now that I'm confident in my ACE calculations, I'm not sure we have the right value for Wilma.  After the final report was issued on Jan. 12, the value was changed from 38.6 to 38.4, but I calculate 38.9.  Can someone verify this?  --Spiffy sperry 22:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My bad, fixing... --Ajm81 23:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think we are still wrong on Wilma. Oct 17 0600Z (reaches TS strength) through to Oct 26 0000Z (Becomes extratropical). Sustained wind readings are: 
(TD), 35, 40, 45, 
55, 60, 65, 75, 
130, 150, 160, 140, 
135, 130, 130, 130, 
130, 130, 125, 120, 
120, 110, 100, 85, 
85, 85, 85, 90, 
95, 110, 100, 105, 
110, 100, 90, 75 
(next reading is 60, but extratropical) 
I make that an ACE of 39.015. Page updated, but I'd be grateful if someone checked the numbers.FrankDynan (talk) 01:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wilma's ACE

message: I was wondering if Cindy's ACE was updated considering the status change? User:tdwuhs:tdwhs
: Yes, it was updated.  You can find out yourself by checking the page history of the article, usually it'll be noted in an edit summary. :) --AySz88^-^ 03:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cindy's ACE 

message: Technically, don't Tropical Deppressions have an ACE value? Why don't they include it?Icelandic Hurricane 23:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, depressions do not have an ACE value. — jdorje (talk) 23:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But couldn't you calculate it?Icelandic Hurricane 12:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is 0. — jdorje (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Look at the definition of ACE.  Only tropical cyclones (i.e., tropical systems of storm strength or higher) get a value. — jdorje (talk) 18:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh.Icelandic Hurricane 20:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: TD ACE?

message: I fixed the Stan entry to reflect the correct (pre-TCR) values of unknown damages and 80-100 deaths.  Any other values are either speculation or counts of the impact of the entire weather system, not of stan itself.  While the stan article does mention those totals, it is not correct to include them in the season totals. — jdorje (talk) 19:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We should wait for the TCR before anything is changed. CrazyC83 00:03, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Has there been any other information other than the year-end summary?  As someone noted in one of the above sections, the year-end summary doesn't say whether the Stan caused a thousand+ deaths indirectly, only that the NHC is counting 80-100 direct deaths for Stan. The NHC apparently never counts indirect deaths. --AySz88^-^ 21:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing official.  There are some unofficial sources: Jeff Masters wrote in his blog that he talked to a Guatemala official, who said there was $1-2 billion in damages, but that's almost certainly including the non-tropical rains.  I know of nothing new from the NHC. — jdorje (talk) 21:48, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stan 

message: The Individual storms table needs references for the death and damage totals for each storm, particularly those that do not match what is given in the TCR.  --Ajm81 00:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual storms table 

message: The first three sections need inline citations for every single record mentioned. Titoxd(?!?) 03:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Shouldn't the Unnamed subtropical storm have an ACE? Nicole did in 2004.--Lionheart Omega 03:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Subtropical time doesn't count towards ACE. See this discussion. --Ajm81 04:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, at this site, Sub-Tropical Storm Nicole is counted toward the ACE total. Also,here, the time storms were sub-tropical was also counted toward ACE. A response please.--Lionheart Omega 01:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The way I understand it, subtropical time is excluded by the definition of ACE.  Some basins do not clearly/reliably differentiate between tropical and subtropical, so the NCDC includes subtopical values when comparing ACE across basins. User:Spiffy sperry could probably explain it better. --Ajm81 19:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still say we should do it the way it is shown on the website. I'll see what Hurricanehink thinks.--Lionheart Omega 23:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The message by the NCDC is clear, subtropical ACE is not part of ACE per se, so no reason to add it. Titoxd(?!?) 02:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm, this is a bit unusual. There are reasons to support either way. Maybe someone should just email them and ask? Hurricanehink (talk) 02:35, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Can you show me this message Titoxd?--Lionheart Omega 21:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm back! I've been busy, but I can now put an ACE count with tropical & subtropical time down, since no on4e gave me proof onethe NCDC policy. Unrelated, you can put 30 knots into the ACE equation and get .3. --Lionheart Omega 17:10, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the NCDC:  --Ajm81 02:53, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnamed Subtropical Storm 

message: "Katrina, Rita and Wilma are the three most intense storms ever in a single Atlantic hurricane season." 
Could someone please clarify that statement for me? As I read it, it's not true. Allen was stronger than Katrina and the Labor Day Storm and Gilbert were stronger than both Katrina or Rita so I'm lost. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 04:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous Sentence 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.weathermatrix.net/tropical/2005records.htm
** In 2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics on 2011-05-25 07:55:18, 404 Not Found
** In 2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics on 2011-06-12 00:28:17, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "costliest":
From 2004 Atlantic hurricane season: 
From 1998 Atlantic hurricane season: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:13, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/hurricanes05.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607002113/http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-ph/RSS/jtwc/atcr/1983atcr/pdf/wnp/11.pdf to http://www.usno.navy.mil/NOOC/nmfc-ph/RSS/jtwc/atcr/1983atcr/pdf/wnp/11.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060318022305/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL052005_Emily.pdf to http:///
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) 06:22, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 2005 Atlantic hurricane season statistics. 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/20060524032544/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL122005_Katrina.pdf to http:///
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060524183736/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL182005_Rita.pdf to http:///
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060524183813/http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL252005_Wilma.pdf to http:///
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) 12:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified