Talk:2006 Atlantic hurricane season/Archive 5

message: Is there a northern and a southern boundary for the NHC to issue warnings in the Atlantic basin? I know that the eastern and western boundaries are the landmasses... CrazyC83 04:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd have to say 0ºN is the limit for the NHC vertically...after that, it's the Southern Atlantic. -- RattleMan 05:13, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I thought. If anything (by a freak of nature) enters the Arctic Ocean (it has happened exactly once), does it remain under NHC control? CrazyC83 15:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Faith, which I assume you were talking about, wasn't tropical in the artic circle, but if somehow something tropical entered the article circle, I would imagine it would remain the NHC's until it became extratropical. Hurricanehink (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, it would then become the AHC's- The Arctic Hurricane Center- run by Santa Claus at the North pole. Hey, he has to do SOMETHING in the offseason. :P -Winter123 19:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If by some random chance a storm managed to track from north to south of the Equator in the Atlantic, it'd still be the responsibility of the NHC, seeing as there isn't an organization in control of forecasting tropical systems in the South Atlantic. --Patteroast 15:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would need more than random chance, it would need a miracle; so far as I know, no cyclone at all has ever crossed the equator. --Golbez 07:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cyclone Agni got close... but anyway, my point is that since there's no organization responsible for the South Atlantic, there's probably not really a firm southern boundary either. --Patteroast 14:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't it be impossible for a cyclone to cross the equator?  To my understanding a tropical cyclone requires the Coriolis force to keep it spinning, and crossing the equator would mean the force spinning in the opposite direction.  I would think something like that would simply dissipate a cyclone before it could cross. Arkyan 19:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cyclones such as Agni and Vamei are so close to the equator that the Coriolis force is negligible, and rotation in the storm is from other sources.  Either way, I should have thought of a less incredible example to make my point that the South Atlantic does not lie in anyone's official area of responsiblity. --Patteroast 09:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basin boundaries 

message: The Tropical Cyclones WikiProject is preparing a newsletter for its members and will be spamming its member list on Sunday. It will give news on the goings-on within the project as well as a summary of the previous months cyclone activity. If you are a member of the wikiproject could you please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. If you are not a member of the project and would like to receive it, join the wikiproject or at least opt-in on the mailing list. Also there are votes currently open to determine the title of the newsletter and the "Member of the month". If you are a WikiProject member please participate in both these votes (note, new nominations will not be accepted now).--Nilfanion (talk) 12:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject newsletter

message: What if it runs out of both names and Greek letters?? What should it use next?? Georgia guy 13:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We had that discussion, and we figured it is extremely unlikely. Last season we only got six letters into the Greek alphabet. Last season was hyperactive, so a season considerably more active than last year's is very unlikely. IIRC, we would have 42 storms, which is near impossible by now. The WPAC has had one season with over 40 storms, but activity was evenly spread throughout the entire year. Given that we're already in June, that doesn't seem likely. Hurricanehink (talk) 13:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Getting 46 named storms in the Atlantic will never happen while humans live on this planet. If the Greek names were retired one by one, it is possible to eventually run out of them (This also won't happen in your lifetime, and certainly naming systems would change before then). To answer your question hypothetically though... they would call it Unnamed Tropical Storm #46 if they didn't put an emergency naming list into effect. (What a hellish year that would be.) —BazookaJoe 03:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we had 46 storms in a year in the atlantic, I'm pretty sure it would be the apocalypse, because there would be about 100 in the W. Pac. -Winter123 20:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone should probably mention this in the article if it isn't already, because I recall this being asked many times last year. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it's such a far-fetched scenario, it's probably better to leave it out of the article. --Coredesat 23:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The Hebrew Alphabet. —TimL 03:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek alphabet 

message: I've been watching this anomaly map become less and less blue over the past month, and now with the most recent update, it's official: NO PART OF THE ATLANTIC IS BELOW AVARAGE! I know, I know, "SSTs do not determine season intensity." 
But they sure help. -Winter123 20:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ummm, I see plenty of areas which are below 0 (ie below average). That includes the southern GoM and off the eastern seaboard...--Nilfanion (talk) 20:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry Spongebob Specific-pants. The color scale isn't that clear. I guess inside the Zero lines it's BARELY below average. But still, the majority of the Atlantic is above average. And it HAS been warming up. -Winter123 20:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The SSTs will bear watching again this year.  However, there has been a small cold water upwelling off of Cape Verde Islands for the last 2-3 months, and it has cooled the Atlandic somewhat.  So for the sub-equatorial North Atlantic the SSTs are cooler in the eastern and central parts, but are warm is the western part and the Carribean.  This points to an early storm season like we had last year, with storms forming the Carribean and becoming a landfall threat to the surrounding land masses and the US. --EMS | Talk 20:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warm atlantic this year 

message: Slashdot currently has an interesting article dealing with some of the forms future malware will take, and it goes into the interesting fact that lots of domain names are already taken dealing with the 2006 hurricane names and containing words like "hurricane", "donation", etc,... Virtually all dot COMs are already registered that are hurricane**name** and **name**relief as well. Better keep an eye on some of these domain names, particularly some of these that might end up being added to the 'external links' section of hurricane articles, as they likely will be linkspam and scam-related. Dr. Cash 00:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Amazing that they've started this so quickly.  I wonder if anyone got Greek letter domains .... It's understandable though.  SargeAbernathy 01:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hurricane-related domain names

message: The section devoted to it has nothing -- there should be information there, though.  I will tag it for expansion soon.  --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 13:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Calm down, it just formed! There's no info out yet ;) Hurricanehink (talk) 13:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the TD1 info? 

message: Should there really be a timeline in this article if there is a separate timeline article? (Sobesurfski 13:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The timeline article (which shouldn't have been made) is basically an archive of the timeline. The timeline in the season article is for recent weeks. Hurricanehink (talk) 13:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the season progresses, the timeline that appears on the front page will be condensed to only the previous fews weeks for length issues.  The entire length of the timeline will be at Timeline of the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season.  See the 2005 season timeline article to see how long this baby could get. --tomf688 (talk - email) 00:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant timelines

message: What's with the short article on the main page?  It's very short...very...very short...  The main article is not the uber abridged version of the season, it's supposed to actually tell stuff. - Bladeswin | Talk to me | 22:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the changes were made so that the text on the season article would be distinguished from the storm article. --Coredesat 22:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Be very careful with that. We don't want 2006AHS's entry on Alberto to look like this... Make sure you keep a decent amount in the season article on Alberto like the storms in 2004 or the 2005 list.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely right Nilfanion.  Remember Coredesat, and all those who think likewise, the Tropical Cyclones are the article.  Without the storms, there's no point in making this article. - Bladeswin | Talk to me | 01:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Archival of Alberto 

message: Do we really need  now? Titoxd(?!?) 00:26, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't hurt.  In a few weeks this won't matter anyways, since there will have been several storms already. --tomf688 (talk - email) 00:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I have several choice words for the creation of the button bar at this time that civility will not allow me to express. --Golbez 00:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't need it, but it doesn't hurt to have it in existence, especially if we will need it later on. Despite my dislike towards the button bars, every storm will likely have an article this season, so no harm in making one. Hurricanehink (talk) 00:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Now that I'm reminded about it, would it be less objectionable to use the format of  for the button bars? --AySz88\^-^ 03:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I prefer the button bar. The "ToC" looks rougher to me than the button bar, and does not blend so well with the page. —Cuiviénen 03:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also prefer the button bar because of its ease of use.  Hovering over each button provides a short description.  Plus, personally, I think it has a nice design, especially for when the season becomes more active.  — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 13:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: What's the problem?? -Winter123 18:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Button bar 

message: 2006 storm names
	 		 	
	 		 	
	 		 	
	 		 	
	 		 	
	 		 	
	 		 	
I believe we should change the three-column list to the table on the right since aligning the names on the right is a more efficient use of space.  Basically, the current layout is widely spaced out on a high resolution and looks amateurish. --tomf688 (talk - email) 03:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think it looks better, but at the same time, it would mean changing every single article with named storms in :Category:Tropical cyclones by season... Titoxd(?!?) 03:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, two points here.  First, it isn't entirely necessary that every article be changed to conform.  Second, couldn't a bot accomplish this?  All I changed were a few things in the header, and a few words in the text (from "the names on the list below" to "the names to the right", i.e.).  Just a thought.  --tomf688 (talk - email) 03:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is fine here, but it somehow needs to be moved to the right a bit.  In my browser, it's a bit squashed against all the text.  — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 14:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added a 1em margin around it, so crowding of text should be fixed now. --tomf688 (talk - email) 16:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the format a bit to remove the table borders. —Cuiviénen 16:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Text still crowds around table.  — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 21:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: We are putting it where the names are now.  — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 21:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I'm going to throw it into the article if there are no reasonable objections. --tomf688 (talk - email) 02:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it looks fine on the right. The left would be absolutely horrendous. bob rulz 22:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting storm names 

message: I reverted HurricaneCraze32's edits linking the 0 in the record low number of major hurricanes in the forecasts box on the grounds that more recent seasons (1994, 1972) also have zero major hurricanes. This brings up a situation with several possible courses of action. In that case, when a record is shared by more than one season, in the box should we:
# Link to the most recent season (1994 in this case) to share that record;
# Have no link for that number (like it was after I reverted it);
# Have no links but the word several after it to indicate that more than one season holds that record;
# Create a new section in the seasons list for seasonal (in)activity records, and link the records in the seasonal forecasts box to the section in the seasons list; or
# Do something different that I haven't thought of.
Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 21:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preseason forecasts box's records 

message: I'm going to do some cleanup on the description of Alberto.  Margie 20:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All right, but there's a bit too MUCH info now.  Also, please insert wikilinks, and spell out all abbreviations.  Although you cleaned up the description, your edit needs cleanup.  IMHO, there is too much inconsistency between this and other descriptions.  I would rather add all of this info to the main storm article.  — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 21:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Sure, I will take a look.  However, I'm going to revert it for now until I get everything organized.  Thanks for all the additional details!  I'm going to add most of it to the main article.  — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 21:40, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alberto cleanup

message: I've removed the image in the lead box.  I believe we established a precedent last season to keep that free of images until a track map of the season is available. --tomf688 (talk - email) 14:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct you are. I reverted what that guy did before, but he put it back up. íslenska hurikein #12(samtal) 14:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you lead me to that discussion, please. It's a hurricane page, so there should be something attrative on the top of it. You can't just leave an infobox picture-less like that. It looks so much better with a picture on the top of it. → JARED (t)  14:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well what picture should it be  a picture of? The current sheared mess the atlantic is right now? :) TimL 18:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just suggested that it be of something of importance currently happening in the Atlantic. For instance, I put an image of Alberto because it was the first storm. Maybe if Beryl comes along, she'd (he'd?) have her (his?) picture up there. I think that leaving it blank, however, with no eye-catching color, etc. is wasteful of the space there is to offer. → JARED (t)  20:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be redundant as  makes use of images of the storms. NSLE 20:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only of one image, though. Even then, you can get rid of the one below. Whatever. → JARED (t)  20:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your reasoning is flawed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. NSLE 20:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I really don't care. I am just trying to get you guys to see my point; I see yours. → JARED (t)  20:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image in lead box