Talk:2005 Azores subtropical storm

message: Well, this is certainly different, but what's with the name? Shouldn't it just be Unnamed Subtropical Storm (2005)?Mitchazenia V5.0
:I was using the 1991 Halloween Nor'easter for precedence. That should be a redirect. I didn't capitalize "subtropical storm" as it is not part of any official name. CrazyC83 21:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well Hur8 of 1991 was an "unnamed but historically significant". Where does this storm fall under the section?Mitchazenia V5.0 21:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't as it wasn't historically significant. It is treated like Subtropical Storm One (1982) and Tropical Depression Nine (2003) - both of those are official names. It has links to the season pages, but is definitely a low-importance page. CrazyC83 21:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I upped it to be class. As mitchazenia said, it is certainly different, and good job for such a storm. The only other thing I can think of adding would be to mention that the NHC checks every year if there were any storms they missed, and that it was the first time since a storm in October of 2000 that was added in post-analysis. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly wasn't easy to find the information as the sources were limited for something that wasn't even known until 6 months after the fact... CrazyC83 03:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually it is officially 21L.NONAME (23 was operationally SD22). CrazyC83 16:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd retargeted that to Lists of tropical cyclone names. However, it should really point to an article on this topic at tropical cyclone naming, which I think would be useful.--Nilfanion (talk) 16:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Assesment

message: I thought we agreed that this storm wouldn't get an article? There's very little information about it - three sources are cited, and two of them are practically the same thing. There is also zero operational information, and next to zero impact. --Coredesat 19:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. Sure, there's only three sources, but it's a pretty good article. I don't see the harm in keeping it. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking the same thing. But i decided to not bring it up because i didn't know the results well.MitchazeniaBob Barker's Retiring... 21:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I've gone ahead and lowered it to start, with the additional pruning of references. Basically, this is an article written off the TCR. No additional info is here that isn't in the TCR. More stuff not in the TCR is needed for us to consider this a B. – Chacor 15:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are TWO's and TWD's archived? I was looking for them... CrazyC83 17:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember the NHC did not pay any attention to this system operationally and it was never an INVEST.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe the TWDs did mention them... FTP archive of October Atlantic TWDs from 2005. – Chacor 09:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No mention in any of the TWDs. Perhaps this should be merged, in that case? --Coredesat 14:21, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, the article is pretty good. Sure, for the most part it only cites the TCR, but I don't see the harm in that. I know, I know, we could just give them a link to the TCR, but if we're building a tropical cyclone encyclopedia (and we are), it is a good thing worth keeping, IMO. Hurricanehink (talk) 20:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a re-write of the TCR. That isn't our job. – Chacor 01:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, our job is to provide a thorough tropical cyclone encyclopedia. Hurricanehink (talk) 01:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Huh?

message: To support my 2005 season project I would like to get it to GA, and I can't think of anything else to add. I am going to mull it over for another couple days and then add it to the GA nominations. Plasticup T/C 22:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks pretty good overall. I'd say flesh out the lead some, and maybe add a couple more refs to the last paragraph of the Impact and records section, and it should easily be GAN-able. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The GAN is up, but the backlog there is so long that it is often quicker to polish an article and push it through FA than it is to wait for a GA reviewer. I guess I shouldn't complain though, because I have only reviewed a couple GAs in my time. Plasticup T/C 15:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the GAN backlog is gradually yet progressively improving. If you look back to march, the number of GANs hit 295. Now we're down to 189. In any event, when this does pass GA, are you planning on taking it to FAC? Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be a bit nervous about putting it up to FAC with only eight citations from two organizations. But yes, if I can find some news sources that give me confidence in this article being comprehensive then I would like to. Plasticup T/C 16:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  To-do? 

message: The map on this page labelled "storm path" is ambiguous in the sense that the storm's beginning and end points cannot be determined. Which is which? A simple directional arrow somewhere along the path would clarify this nicely.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.77.79.33 (talk) 02:56, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map is ambiguous 

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.sun-herald.com/NewsArchive4/041306/tp8de8.htm?date=041306&story=tp8de8.htm
** In 2005 Azores subtropical storm on 2011-05-25 07:55:51, 404 Not Found
** In 2005 Azores subtropical storm on 2011-06-12 00:30:05, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 00:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on 2005 Azores subtropical storm. 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/20080910002905/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/2005.pdf to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/lib1/nhclib/mwreviews/2005.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2005 Azores subtropical storm. 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/20080916070017/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/tracks1851to2007-apr08.txt to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/hurdat/tracks1851to2007-apr08.txt
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) 10:24, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article no longer meets featured article criteria, I believe. There is no reason why it is notable anymore except for breaking a couple of records. That isn't a reason to have the article. It didn't make landfall, and it wasn't a super-intense storm (why else does Cyclone Kyarr have an article?). The whole "Tammy would be named Vince, Vince would be named Wilma, Wilma would be named alpha" I removed because people can infer that in their heads. This is like Hurricane Pablo (Talk:2019 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 1#Hurricane Pablo). Broke a few records, but can all be covered in one little season section. WP:TMI for this article. 🐔Chicdat ChickenDatabase 12:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The first sentence has nothing to do with the rest of your argument, which is basically WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (which I think is applicable in non-conventional ways here). From my prospective, I don't see the upside to taking someone's article down just for the sake of it, and there hasn't been an urge to do it by the season article contributors either. Therefore, I think the status quo of a spinoff remains adequate. YE Pacific Hurricane 16:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

text: I dont see anything here indicating that the article doesnt meet the featured article criteria. Everything in the season article would be covered in more detail in a subarticle anyways. It seems that you are just upset that the result of the merge discussion was no consensus/towards keep on two separate occasions during the past few months. I reverted your reopening of an archived merge discussion for a reason. While this article is on the shorter side, keep in mind how large the article is that you want to merge this into. It already needs to grow a bit more to cover major aspects of the retired storms. I think this should be closed. NoahTalk 00:43, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR