Please accept this invitation to join the Tropical cyclones WikiProject (WPTC), a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with tropical cyclones. WPTC hosts some of Wikipedia's highest-viewed articles, and needs your help for the upcoming cyclone season. Simply click here to accept!

Darren 23 ^{Edits| Mail} 06:32, 3 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks, Darren. I could help to improve TC articles during the upcoming cyclone season. I am not perfectly new to Wikipedia; the IP guy that was me was here for 2 or so years, although I still might need a thing or two to know on Wikipedia. I will do what I can to help, though. Rye998 ( talk) 09:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC) reply

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	I hereby award you this barnstar for helping the Hurricane Igor article to be of its current quality, which is impressive considering the article's short existence. Well done. Thegreatdr ( talk) 16:10, 18 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks! I didn't make the article myself, but I did update the advisories on the storm itself while it was active. It is pretty much gone now... I also improved it in other ways possible, which could have helped as well. Rye998 ( talk) 21:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, Rye, Since you seem to catch things before any of us can I would like to invite you to join the WPTC IRC. Just go to this link, put your nickname, and in the channel, put #wiki-hurricanes. Jason Rees ( talk) 00:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

In general, what is the website for? Is it some kind of forecasting online website or something like that? Rye998 ( talk) 19:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Its a chatroom that several members of the WPTC use to communicate with each other about TCs & other things. Jason Rees ( talk) 22:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC) reply

One more question - where do you make sandboxes for storm articles on WPTC? I haven't made an article yet, but I would like to know how to... Rye998 ( talk) 19:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC) reply

You can make them in userspace (ie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rye998/INSERT TITLE OF SANDBOX) or in project space such as SANDBOX TITLE HERE. Jason Rees ( talk) 22:43, 11 October 2010 (UTC) reply

The other day you were looking for a reliable reference that compared Named Storm in the AHS to the PTS. Ive found one from the Tropical Storm Risk consortium. Jason Rees ( talk) 01:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, as CB mentioned, the WPac season was at record low values this year, so it isn't surprising that the Atlantic was ahead. I was also surprised to see Omeka come onto us; It appears 2010 now ties for least active rather than beat 1977, but we still had the record low number of hurricanes. If possible, I could make an article on it if necessary, but I have lots of work and studying to do right now, so I probrably can't make one right this instant. Also, I have another record-question - was the ACE value in the 2010 season this year higher than the WPac as well? The reference says the index was lower, but the ACE total was 161.2 in the Atlantic(pending post-season changes) and the ACE in the WPac? I think it was lower than the Atlantic in this year, but the reference you mentioned earlier doesn't use exact numbers. Rye998 ( talk) 20:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC) reply

This is an important lesson in your training on wikipedia, if you're ever going to send an article through GA or FA reviews. =) There is a cite button on the top-center part of the edit window. Click on that, that choose an appropriate template (clicking and then choosing) on the top left and fill in the information. If it is only published on the internet, choose cite web. If you're ever going to get an article through the Good Article review process, it's best to use a journal or book reference. That won't be available for this hurricane/typhoon season for a couple years, most likely. Some of us dinosaurs still type it in by hand, but those buttons really simplify the process. Thegreatdr ( talk) 18:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

So you just click on the book-like thing and type in the link name, and then you click reference and it goes in? I just did that in the 2010 AHS article, BTW. Rye998 ( talk) 20:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC) reply

It's definitely a start. I believe you can only construct a ref from scratch that way. I tried using it a little while back, and it's slightly more cumbersome than I would have thought, but still, better that way than a bare external link. Play around with it and see what you're able to code that way, if for no other reason, to see how it is coded. Refs automatically show up in the reflist. Thegreatdr ( talk) 02:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC) reply

But can I put all references in that way? I mean, is there a problem with not putting them in the other format? I don't know how to do the other form, but unless I have to put it in that way, I don't see a big problem with the way I put that one in... Rye998 ( talk) 19:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi Rye,

I saw that you edited another editor's comment in this edit. It is generally considered rude to edit the comments of others, unless you have the commentator's permission. I'll wait for you to respond before restoring the original comment, since I don't know whether or not you had the permission of the editor who wrote the comment in question. Cheers, Dylan620 ^{( I'm all ears)} 20:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Ay, sorry, I thought he made a typo or something, I know it's rude to edit other people's posts, but I also like to see good grammar in writing. It's a little irritating to me to see other people make mistakes, but I guess I shouldn't change it for them. Sorry to Anirudh Emani. -- Rye998 ( talk) 23:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC) reply

The JMA will update both Nanmadol and Talas' information in about 10 to 30 minutes.-- Meow ✉ 12:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC) reply

I normally refer to [www.weather.unisys.com UNISYS] for the latest data since JMA doesn't update until after the best track does. IF JMA is prefered over the UNISYS files, then I won't be impatient for them to update. Rye998 ( talk) 12:46, 30 August 2011 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, Rye998. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, Rye998. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Hello, Rye998. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC) reply

Hey, I figured we could continue the dialogue on your actual user talk page. So you're interested in tropical cyclones I take it. What basin/time period are your favorite? ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 00:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC) reply

In recent years I've found the most enjoyable basin to track is the East Pacific at peak season, since most of the strong hurricanes remain out at sea without affecting land, so it's fun to root for them to be strong and long-lived. That's not as common in the other basins around the world. I used to be more active on WPTC in the past, back in 2010-12, though I've been on HWiki (as Ryan1000) much more often. Rye998 ( talk) 02:42, 23 March 2020 (UTC) reply

I'm not really familiar with the HWiki, just that there are a lot of fake seasons there. Have you seen that the EPAC has list articles for List of Category 1 Pacific hurricanes, all the way up to Cat 5? There's also a List of Eastern Pacific tropical storms, which is only half done, and could use the help, if you're bored and looking for something to edit :P ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk) 13:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC) reply

The regular hurricane wiki is actually mostly stable, but other similar wikis like the "hypothetical hurricanes wiki" has a bunch of random future seasons and wild predictions. I don't go there though. Storm2K and WUnderground are probably more popular forums anyways.

I also wanted to make some changes to the 1966-70 seasons based on a video that Dylan620 (HurricaneMaker99) linked on the hurricane wiki before that showed that the hurricane reanalysis project already completed the 1966-70 seasons some time ago, with many notable changes, though NOAA hasn't officially published them yet. Some of these include things like Faith's track being cut a lot shorter, Inez being upgraded to a 165 mph cat 5, Celia of 1970 being upgraded to a 140 mph cat 4 at its Texas landfall, and many more storms (including Kendra of 1966) being added back to the database. I think Beulah of 1967 was downgraded to a cat 3-4 at its landfall in reanalysis too, since it never produced category 5 winds at its landfall in Texas despite the current track of the storm clearly showing a cat 5 landfall, but that wasn't mentioned in the video. Should some of those 1966-70 changes be mentioned in those season articles, or is the reanalysis project still doing some last-minute work before they officially publish those seasons? Rye998 ( talk) 22:33, 23 March 2020 (UTC) reply