User talk:Jdorje/Archive5

Your edit here replaced correct syntax with wrong. I reverted it. — jdorje (talk) 04:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC) I respectfully disagree based on rule number 9 here[1]. I recognize that English is often bastardized and this rule is frequently ignored, but that fact doesn't discourage me from trying to improve Wikipedia in this regard. I won't manually revert your change, since you are more interested in Tropical Storm Olga than I am, but it's possible that my semi-bot will catch it again. If so, I apologize in advance.--Appraiser 13:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that you have several years possessing storms. You might want to rethink that concept. (Or not; I don't want to be critical.) My bot looks for the (literally) 1000s of cases where people write things like, "The fashion industry created short skirts in the 1960's." That's why I didn't have it looking for "1974's," etc. That just doesn't fit the pattern of misuse. Thanks.--Appraiser 19:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article, you substantially expanded, has passed it's good article review . You may want to see the talk page for any other comments. Well done! Rudget _talk 19:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: your creation

1. This has been put up at tfd, and I defended it since it appears on several projects pages... Only then did I peek under the hood.
2. What were you trying for it to do... nom believes you agree it's broken, can I help?
3. If you agree it's trash, best retag with {{db-author}}, and save others visiting tfd the trouble. Leave the tfd template on the page so the deleting admin will close that section.

Best wishes // FrankB 21:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jdorje -- As you may recall, the edit history for 1923 Great Kantō earthquake reveals that Jdorje moved Great Kanto earthquake to 1923 Great Kanto earthquake in January 2006 because "unnamed" events should include the year in the name." It looks like you got it right, and some of the rest of us are just catching up to you almost two years later.

Would you consider making a contribution to an exchange of views at either of the following:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disaster management#Renaming 1703 Genroku earthquake?
• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan#Renaming 1703 Genroku earthquake?

As you may know, Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management came up with entirely reasonable guidelines for naming articles about earthquakes, fires, typhoons, etc. However, the <<year>><<place> <<event>> format leaves no opportunity for conventional nengō which have been used in Japan since the eighth century (701-1945) -- as in "the Great Fire of Meireki" (1657) or for "the Hōei eruption of Mount Fuji" (1707).

In a purely intellectual sense, I do look forward to discovering how this exchange of views will develop; but I also have an ulterior motive. I hope to learn something about how better to argue in favor of a non-standard exception to conventional, consensus-driven, and ordinarily helpful wiki-standards such as this one. In my view, there does need to be some modest variation in the conventional paradigms for historical terms which have evolved in non-Western cultures -- no less in Wikipedia than elsewhere. I'm persuaded that, at least in the context of Japanese history before the reign of Emperor Meiji (1868-1912), some non-standard variations seem essential; but I'm not sure how best to present my reasoning to those who don't already agree with me. I know these first steps are inevitably awkward; but there you have it.

The newly-created 1703 Genroku earthquake article pushed just the right buttons for me. Obviously, these are questions that I'd been pondering for some time; and this became a convenient opportunity to move forward in a process of building a new kind of evolving consensus. --Ooperhoofd (talk) 20:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hurricanehink/Active

Hi. How does that track map work? Juliancolton (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should be pretty well explained in the docs with the code and in the tracks page. What more do you want to know specifically? — jdorje (talk) 00:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• 1857 - H2
• 1858 - H3
• 1861 - H5, H8
• 1866 - H7
• 1867 - H2
• 1874 - H6
• 1876 - H2
• 1878 - H11
• 1879 - H2
• 1880 - H6
• 1881 - H6
• 1882 - H6
• 1883 - H3
• 1885 - H2
• 1887 - H6, H7
• 1893 - H6, H9
• 1896 - H4
• 1899 - H3, H8

Thanks if you can do this. And also, it'd be nice if it was zoomed in on the state; if you think there are too many, one option would be to restrict it only to hurricanes that actually crossed the state's coastline. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These images already exist. Look at this commons category for a full list; or see here for the first picture you're looking for. Making maps that are zoomed in on the state is possible but it's not really going to give any additional detail for most storms since the 6-hour intervals usually cover 100-150 miles each; also I think we'd want a different background map for that which showed the state boundaries (that could actually be kinda cool).

Sorry, I meant a track map that combined all of that. Is that still doable? --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've limited the list to hurricanes in the state. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary map here. Several problems. First, the resolution is terrible, and this isn't easy to fix since it requires using a larger background image which gives the program problems because the entire earth map must be loaded (next next largest image is 67 megabytes). Secondly, without a state outline overlay it isn't really easy to see much. We can have it throw a state outline image on top if we can find such a thing. I changed both lines and dots to 1/5 their normal size; previously the whole thing looked massive. I do wonder what the settings for the florida map are though. — jdorje (talk) 10:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The mysterious 2006 central Pacific cyclone. This is just one system, but it is unofficial. Unofficial track data is here. Thanks, Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• List of wettest tropical cyclones by country is the main article I'm most concerned about...it originally was part of the tropical cyclone rainfall climatology page before reviewers suggested that it become a separate, independent list in order for the previous parent article to pass GA. The regional TC rainfall project pages from HPC have taken care of the list of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States, which was created by request. If notability requires lists already being created for list inclusion within wikipedia, then the list for countries other than the United States, Japan, Taiwan, Mexico, and Cuba would make the TC rainfall list non-notable (unless I'm still misinterpreting what makes a list notable). China has a list of sorts created in a book they published last year, but the table headers are in Mandarin (hope I spelled that right). The Bureau of Meteorology has listed enough of their wetter tropical cyclones within their references to make their list notable (I guess). If importance matters for notability (which it seems is irrelevent) then the rainfall lists are very important for inclusion into wikipedia. There is no other organized source for this information, on a global basis. Thegreatdr (talk) 19:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There is no other organized source for this information, on a global basis." According to the notability guideline, I'm fairly sure that means global listing of rainfall data isn't "notable" in an encyclopedic sense. But this is a tough question...everyone will agree that the rainfall data is important, it is the list itself that is questionable. Perhaps the wikiproject should write our own guidelines for notability. Hmm. — jdorje (talk) 04:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The December issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. --♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NilfaBot is my bot account (was used primarily for another role. For the bulk uploading, I just used the Commonist...

As for the NC map, commons:Category:Cumulative tropical cyclone tracks contains the existing maps of that type. I'd suggest a crop similar to the Delaware track is most appropriate. There are several things that could be improved about those image but that they are satisfactory. Better to be OK right now, than perfect in 10 years. I think significant improvements (not things like state outline overlays) would require a major recoding.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For creating the WPTC, staying here the whole time, doing the track maps, etc. etc. etc. Thanks for all of your great work. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man. — jdorje (talk) 06:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The January issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Template:Hurricane season links requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The February issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I have reviewed Hurricane Camille and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left this message on your talk page since you have significantly edited the article (based on using this article history tool). Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix with the assistance of multiple editors. I have also left messages on the talk pages for other editors and a related WikiProject to spread the workload around some. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 22:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The March issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on the Tropical cyclone WikiProject for almost four years now and I know that at times it can be pretty draining. Hurricanehink and I started a fun little thing two years ago called the Hurricane Hall of Fame (based on a concept I'd created much earlier). It works just like any other Hall of Fame: every year, five storms are voted in based on notability. Up until now, the voters were just me and Hink and the honorees were just Atlantic storms. Both of those are changing (hopefully). I'm trying to get more Project members involved in the voting and I'm going international this year. This ballot is for the Eastern Pacific. Following this election, I'll send out ballots for the Western Pacific and then perhaps the Indian Ocean...all leading up to the Atlantic ballot early this summer. I'd really appreciate your participation. It's just for fun; something to lower stress levels. I'll announce the winners next weekend. The nominees are...

• 1939 Long Beach Tropical Storm - Only tropical storm to make landfall in California in the 20th Century, killed in excess of 40 people at sea and in floods.
• 1959 Mexico Hurricane - deadliest Eastern Pacific storm in history, 1000-1800 dead.
• Hurricane Tara - killed over 500 people in floods in central Mexico.
• Hurricane Liza - over 600 people were killed in devastating floods in Baja California.
• Hurricane Paul - slow-moving storm left over 1000 dead in Central America.
• Hurricane Iniki - most damaging hurricane in Hawaii's history, causing $2.6 billion in uninflated damage.
• Hurricane John - longest lived tropical cyclone ever recorded worldwide; 31 days.
• Hurricane Ismael - caused devastating flooding that killed 116 people in Mexico.
• Hurricane Linda - strongest Eastern Pacific storm ever recorded.
• Hurricane Pauline - devastated Mexico, killing 230 people and causing $7.5 billion in damage.
• Choose three of these that you most want in. Post your votes on my talk page. The five top vote-getters will be inducted.
  

-- §HurricaneERICarchive 01:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The April issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The May issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The June issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am asking you about this because you were the main contrinbutor to Hurricane Hattie-Simone back when the Start-Class article was drawn up. I can't find any sources confirming that Hurricane Hattie and Tropical Storm Simone shared the same circulation, nor that TS Inga was related to either of them. None of the storms are mentioned in each others' NHC Preliminary Reports, nor anywhere else. Is there a major source that I am missing? Where can I confirm that the two storms were actually the same system? Plasticup ^T/C 13:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved this to the storm's talk page. — jdorje (talk) 06:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jdorje. I was trying to get the track map generator to compile (from the SVN source), and I ran into the following error after ./autogen.sh && make:

./configure: line 5025: syntax error near unexpected token `TRACK,'
./configure: line 5025: `PKG_CHECK_MODULES(TRACK, cairo >= 1.0.0)'

I'm not really sure what is wrong there, and I'd really like to use the generator for newer storms. Do you know how to fix it? Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 19:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely this happens because you don't have pkg-config present. This will require a pkg-config.m4 or some similar file that defines the PKG_CHECK_MODULES macro. Although...I suppose if configure were included in the svn (as it would be in a "make dist" tarball) you wouldn't need to rerun autogen and so wouldn't need it. — jdorje (talk) 20:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Putting the configure file on the repo would be really helpful, as I can't get the program to install, even after installing pkgconfig on my Mac. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 02:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The July issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The August issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that if I wish to change the course of how things are done in the project I should appeal to the person who created it. I want to open a dialogue with you. 365 daysz (talk) 03:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My involvement these days is quite spotty. Any discussion on the WPTC should be taken up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tropical cyclones‎. — jdorje (talk) 03:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you created this template, you might want to know that it is up for deletion[2].Potapych (talk) 14:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove Category:2008 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricane Kyle but leave the other two hurricane-season categories? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 13:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was cleaning up Category:2008 Atlantic hurricane season. Perhaps this could use discussion but I feel when the season already has an article for the storm, the DAB article should not be included in that category. Thus when looking at the category you see only one article (the right one) for each storm. — jdorje (talk) 17:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion started. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Tropical Storm Norbert (2008) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Leave Message orYellow Evan home 03:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Septeber issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you creat all these credriects I asked for articles not redrects.--Leave Message orYellow Evan home 22:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect sends the reader to the page that has the information about the storm. — jdorje (talk) 22:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not when i am trying to creat articles. this makes it harder when anyone writes them. Please dealt them because you created them. Leave Message orYellow Evan home 22:46, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? First, we've told you not to create articles until you learn to write better, and to follow Wikipedia's policy. That said, you can always just blank the redirect and write over it. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problm is i am not an admiastor. i want be and then i could deatl articles. Anyone dealet.Leave Message orYellow Evan home 23:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to be an administrator to write an article. Just remove the text, #redirect [[X]] and write the article. However, I still strongly suggest you don't write the articles, at this time. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 23:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

./configure: line 5026: syntax error near unexpected token `TRACK,'
./configure: line 5026: `PKG_CHECK_MODULES(TRACK, cairo >= 1.0.0)'