User talk:FleurDeOdile

Hello, FleurDeOdile, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! United States Man (talk) 21:47, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply] Getting started Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Help directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

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!

--B dash (talk) 03:34, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do you manage to get the black swaths off of worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov so early in the day? I have the black shadows over the countries and I then have to wait for it to be uploaded to the database for them to be removed. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RecentEdits (talk • contribs) 15:47, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

i use paint.net or GIMP to rotate the image so it doesn't show any black lines. using suomi npp imagery works as it doesnt have any missing data lines but sometimes it can look weird with a line cutting storms in half FleurDeOdile 16:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the contribution here on Wikipedia. But it seems your image is completely similar on my friend's (Yukaribba's). It is completely similar, except for one thing. The coastlines. Well, I occasionally use these coastlines if a storm is nearing landfall (ex. File:Maria 2017-09-18 1815Z.jpg) and I don't really use them actually. Everyone here avoids the coastlines' thing, and such a beautiful pictures you upload (or overwrite, like in the 2006 typhoon season.) is just being disgusted by coastlines. I suggest you will avoid the coastlines to make a near-perfect picture of a cyclone. - 👦🗣️ 07:01, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please revert my edits back? (I can’t because my computer just died) Tropical Disturbance 06 was upgraded to Moderate Tropical Storm 10. This was stated by JTWC. Jayab314 (talk) 03:30, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MFR is keeping it as a distubance offically. JTWC is unofficial FleurDeOdile 03:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Fleur. Thanks for your edits to 1968–69 Australian region cyclone season. Is there any chance you might be interested in making some other older Australian season articles? I'm thinking we should have them back to the start of naming (63-64 IIRC). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

have been working on the tracks for 1968-69 but i may do the tracks for those FleurDeOdile 17:55, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi read your message from the articles revision history. I understand that the system is not named and i do not see what capital letter writing is going to accomplish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Planespotter 748 (talk • contribs) 00:45, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you have colored my (crusty, if you say) night images so:

		The Tropical Cyclone Barnstar
		Thank you for your responds in my request.

- 👦🗣️ 05:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading the image for Lili. However, it is incredibly dark and far too zoomed out, and as such, does not match the features of images used in cyclone articles. I proceeded to fix this, and would kindly ask that you do not revert to the original simply for the sake of keeping your own original image. I would also ask that you do not make objectively false assertions to support your viewpoint, as this is deceptive. The central dense overcast in the image that I uploaded is centred, whereas yours is offset below and to the right of centre. Thank you in anticipation of your cooperation on this matter.

P.S. You should note that the image has blue in it because the ocean is blue. The darkness of your image makes the ocean look black.ChocolateTrain (talk) 03:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I see that you updated strengths of Australian tropical cyclones and you mentions that it's from the IBTrACS wind data. Can you show me a link to where you got that? Thanks! INeedSupport ^:3 22:24, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

wind data comes from here FleurDeOdile 22:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! INeedSupport ^:3 01:18, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Volume XIV, Issue 39, May 31, 2019 The Hurricane Herald is the arbitrarily periodical newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The newsletter aims to provide in summary the recent activities and developments of the WikiProject, in addition to global tropical cyclone activity. The Hurricane Herald has been running since its first edition ran on June 4, 2006; it has been almost thirteen years since that time. If you wish to receive or discontinue subscription to this newsletter, please visit the mailing list. This issue of The Hurricane Herald covers all project related events from April 14–May 31, 2019. This edition's editor and author is Hurricane Noah (talk · contribs). Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve the newsletter and other cyclone-related articles. Past editions can be viewed here. ← 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 →

Article of the month, by Jason Rees History of tropical cyclone naming - The practice of using names to identify tropical cyclones goes back several centuries, with storms named after places, saints or things they hit before the formal start of naming in each basin. The credit for the first usage of personal names for weather systems is given to the Queensland Government Meteorologist Clement Wragge, who named tropical cyclones and anticyclones between 1887 and 1907. This system of naming fell into disuse for several years after Wragge retired, until it was revived in the latter part of World War II for the Western Pacific basin. Over the following decades, various naming schemes have been introduced for the world's oceans, including for parts of the Atlantic, Pacific and the Indian Ocean. The majority of these lists are compiled by the World Meteorological Organization's tropical cyclone committee for the region and include names from different cultures as well as languages. Over the years there has been controversy over the names used at various times, with names being dropped for religious and political reasons. For example, female names were exclusively used in the basins at various times between 1945 - 2000 and were the subject of several protests. The names of significant tropical cyclones in the North Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean and Australian region are retired from the naming lists and replaced with another name, at meetings of the various tropical cyclone committees. Storm of the month and other tropical activity Cyclone Fani was an extremely severe cyclonic storm that made landfall in Odisha, India on May 3. The storm achieved peak intensity as a near Category 5-equivalent cyclone with 3-minute sustained winds of 215 km/h (130 mph), 1-minute sustained winds of 250 km/h (155 mph), and a minimum central pressure of 937 hPa (mbar). Fani caused over $1.8 billion (2019 USD) in damage in India and Bangladesh and killed at least 89 people. Since the last newsletter, twelve systems have formed. Southwest Indian Ocean In the Southwest Indian Ocean, Cyclone Kenneth made landfall in Mozambique approximately 1 month after Cyclone Idai, causing widespread flooding and destruction. Overall, Kenneth killed at least 52 people and caused more than $100 million in damage. Additionally, Tropical Cyclone Lorna formed over the eastern portion of the basin in late April and dissipated in early May without affecting land. Australian Region In the Australian Region, cyclones Lili and Ann formed in early May and both affected land. No deaths were reported, although Lili caused moderate damage in the Maluku Islands and East Timor. South Pacific In the South Pacific, a tropical depression formed in mid-may, but failed to intensify and dissipated a few days later. South Atlantic In the South Atlantic, Subtropical Storm Jaguar formed in late May and lasted for approximately two days before becoming extratropical. Western Pacific In the Western Pacific, three weak tropical depressions existed during the first half of May. North Atlantic In the North Atlantic, Subtropical Storm Andrea formed on the same day as Jaguar, but failed to intensify and dissipated on the next day. The Eastern Pacific hurricane season began on May 15. The Atlantic hurricane season will begin at 2:00 AM EDT on June 1. The Central Pacific hurricane season will begin sometime after 12:00 AM HST on June 1. Recent storms of the month Edition Storm 36 Cyclone Idai 35 Typhoon Wutip (2019) New WikiProject Members since the last newsletter in April 2019 More information can be found here. This list lists members who have joined/rejoined the WikiProject since the release of the last issue in April 2019. Sorted chronologically. Struckout users denote users who have left or have been banned. Super Typhoon Eden (talk · contribs) SaiTheCyclone (talk · contribs) To our new members: welcome to the project, and happy editing! Feel free to check the to-do list at the bottom right of the newsletter for things that you might want to work on. To our veteran members: thank you for your edits and your tireless contributions! Editorial for welcoming new users, by Hurricanehink Every year, editors new and old help maintain the new season of season articles. The older users are likely used to the standards of the project, such as how to Wikilink and reference properly. Newer users might make mistakes, and they might make them over and over again if they don't know better. If anyone (who happens to read this) comes across a new user, please don't bite, because with enough pushback, they'll decide that this group of editors is too mean, and unfun. This is all a volunteer project; no one can force anyone to do anything. We're all on here because of our love of knowledge and tropical cyclones. If you find someone new, consider using the official WPTC welcome template - Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Welcome. I also encourage that if you know any tropical cyclone researchers, please speak up and try recruiting them to edit. Veteran editors can't keep editing forever. Life gets busy, and the real world beckons! Member of the month (edition) – Yellow Evan Yellow Evan has been involved with WPTC since 2008. Since the last newsletter, Yellow Evan has taken 5 typhoon articles to good article status as well as created 2 more. Overall, he has created and/or significantly contributed to more than 130 good articles. Your work in the Western Pacific Basin is invaluable... Thank you for your contributions! Latest WikiProject Alerts The following are the latest article developments as updated by AAlertBot, as of the publishing of this issue. Due to the bot workings, some of these updates may seem out of place; nonetheless, they are included here. Article alerts Featured article candidates 15 Oct 2024 – Hurricane Dennis (talk · edit · hist) was FA nominated by Hurricanehink (t · c); see discussion Featured list candidates 22 Oct 2024 – Timeline of the 2019 Pacific typhoon season (talk · edit · hist) was FL nominated by JCMLuis (t · c); see discussion Good article nominees 18 Nov 2024 – Tropical Storm Maria (2024) (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by HurricaneEdgar (t · c); start discussion 24 Oct 2024 – Hurricane Wilma (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by 12george1 (t · c); start discussion 09 Apr 2024 – 1873 Atlantic hurricane season (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by 12george1 (t · c); start discussion Good article reassessments 06 Nov 2024 – Hurricane Allen (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for GA reassessment by JCMLuis (t · c); see discussion Peer reviews 26 Aug 2024 – Tropical Storm Kai-tak (talk · edit · hist) has been put up for PR by TheNuggeteer (t · c); see discussion Requested moves 25 Oct 2024 – Tropical Storm Trami (2024) (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Tropical Storm Trami by HurricaneEdgar (t · c); see discussion 17 Nov 2024 – Typhoon Yagi (talk · edit · hist) move request to Typhoon Yagi (2024) by Anenglishguyinthephils95 (t · c) was not moved; see discussion 17 Nov 2024 – Typhoon Man-yi (2024) (talk · edit · hist) move request to Typhoon Man-yi by Zzzs (t · c) was closed; see discussion Articles to be merged 21 Nov 2024 – Typhoon Rex (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to 1998 Pacific typhoon season by Accordthemusician (t · c); see discussion 18 Nov 2024 – Hurricane Hernan (2002) (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to 2002 Pacific hurricane season by Zzzs (t · c); see discussion 05 Nov 2024 – Tropical Storm Agatha (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Effects of Tropical Storm Agatha in Guatemala by 74.101.118.218 (t · c); see discussion 05 Nov 2024 – Effects of Tropical Storm Agatha in Guatemala (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Tropical Storm Agatha by 74.101.118.218 (t · c); see discussion Articles to be split 19 Nov 2024 – Hurricane Helene (talk · edit · hist) proposed for splitting by Ponyo (t · c) was closed; see discussion Updated daily by AAlertBot — Discuss? / Report bug? / Request feature? Click to watch (Subscribe via  RSS  Atom) · Find Article Alerts for other topics! Featured Content This section lists content that have become featured, articles and lists, since the past newsletter in mid-April 2019. From April 14–May 31, 2019, 1 featured article was promoted: Cyclone Raja Featured article reviews are currently open for the 1900 Galveston hurricane and Tropical Storm Carlotta (2018) Featured list review is open for the Timeline of the 2018 Atlantic hurricane season WikiProject Tropical Cyclones: News & Developments An awards program for the project began on May 31. It involves 25 levels that may be gained by earning points for completing various actions such as getting good or featured articles. Additional awards will be added in the future. As of this news letter, there are more articles ranked a good article or better (1317) than articles ranked B-class or worse (1272), for the first time in the project's history. Every Atlantic hurricane season from 1945 to 2007 is rated at least a GA. That is an impressive feat, and an incredibly body of work among many editors. Cyclone Raja became the 150th featured article in the project. Thanks to all of the editors and their tireless edits for writing 2.7% of all of Wikipedia's featured articles. In the 24 hours after Hurricane Michael's TCR was released, the article on the hurricane was edited 82 times by 18 different users. In March 2019, the most popular article in the project was Cyclone Idai, viewed 231,969 times during the month. The generic cyclone was 2nd most popular, with 131,080 views. In 3rd place was Hurricane Katrina with 112,283 views. Included in the top 20 were the 2018 and 19 Atlantic hurricane seasons, hurricanes Michael, Florence, Irma, Maria, and Harvey, and the 1896 Cedar Keys hurricane, which was TFA on March 20th. New articles since the last newsletter include: Cyclone Veronica List of Eastern Pacific tropical storms (2000–present) Tropical cyclones by year - from 2000 to present, there were 2,490 tropical cyclones of various intensity, causing a collective $1 trillion in damage and 200,000 deaths Tropical cyclones in the Mascarene Islands Typhoon Percy (1990) Tropical Storm Rolf Cyclone Ann Cyclone Lili (2019) Cyclone Savannah Typhoon Eli (1992) New GA's include: 1900 Galveston hurricane 1974 Atlantic hurricane season 1977 Pacific hurricane season 2015 Pacific hurricane season Effects of Hurricane Floyd in Florida Hurricane Dora (1999) Tropical Storm Carlotta (2018) Tropical Storm Irving (1992) Typhoon Janis (1992) Typhoon Kent Typhoon Ofelia Typhoon Robyn (1993) Current assessment table Assessments valid as of this printing. Depending on when you may be viewing this newsletter, the table may be outdated. See here for the latest, most up to date statistics. As of this issue, there are 150 featured articles and 69 featured lists. There are 142 A-class articles, but that number is subject to change, depending if we mandate that all A-class articles have an A-class review first. There are 956 good articles, meaning it is possible we get to our 1000th GA by the end of the year. There are only 61 B-class articles, perhaps because because most articles of that quality already passed a GA review. There are 350 C-class articles, 720 start-class articles, and 141 stub-class articles, with 29 lists and 8 current articles. The number of lists may decrease further as the "Tropical cyclone X" articles continue to be reclassified as set index articles. These figures mean that nearly half of the project is rated a GA or better - including the lists/current/future articles, there are 1272 articles that are below GA status, versus 1317 that are GA or better. About the assessment scale → From the Main Page From the Main Page documents WikiProject related materials that have appeared on the main page from April 14–May 31, 2019 in chronological order. Today's Featured Article May 4 - Tropical Storm Nicole (2010) May 15 - Tropical Depression Nineteen-E (2018) Did you know...? WikiProject To-Do Here are some tasks you can do: Requests: Original-content tropical cyclone articles: 1936 Mid-Atlantic hurricane, List of Eastern Pacific tropical storms and other intensity lists, Typhoon Yancy (1990), 1971 Odisha cyclone, Cyclone Gervaise, Cyclone Sid, Cyclone Keni, more Wikify: Make sure tropical cyclone lists, such as List of Texas hurricanes, have storm articles properly linked Cleanup: Hurricane Rita, Hurricane Wilma, Tropical Storm Fay (2002), Tropical cyclones in 2017 Expand: Indianola Hurricane of 1886, Typhoon Nina (1975), Typhoon Durian, Tropical cyclones in 2016/2015/2014, List of Category 1 Pacific hurricanes, Pacific hurricane season timelines Stubs: 1876 Bengal cyclone, 1978 Sri Lanka cyclone, Cyclone Prema, List of off-season Australian region tropical cyclones, List of Texas hurricanes (pre-1900), Typhoon Fred (1994), more... WPTC 15th Anniversary push: some goals for the 15th year of WPTC include the creation or improvement of many other articles listed in the first section on the WPTC talk page. Project Goals & Progress The following is the current progress on the three milestone goals set by the WikiProject as of this publishing. They can be found, updated, at the main WikiProject page. 250 featured pages: 87.2% complete 150 featured articles: 99.3% complete 1500 good articles: 87.2% complete All articles to C-class or better: 66.8% complete Write the next issue of The Hurricane Herald →

Noah^Talk 22:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that you consistently overwrite my cyclone image uploads without much reason. Sometimes your upload is better, but often, your images are no better than the ones that were already there, and commonly they are worse. If you are going to overwrite something, please provide actual evidence which supports your overwrite, rather than just "This is better" as a reason. That is simply an opinion of yours, and it appears as though you are just overwriting other people's images because you want your own images to be the ones used. Regarding the Vayu image, the original has far better colour quality and is not washed out and dusty in appearance. Furthermore, it has the correct ratio that is used conventionally used in images of cyclones here on Wikipedia. It is also closer up to the cyclone so that more details are visible. The cyclone only takes up a tiny amount of the field in the image you uploaded, when Vayu is supposed to be the subject of the photo, not the deserts of India and Pakistan. I hope that in the future you can make some more productive edits such as contributing information to Vayu's article section, rather than overwriting images all the time. ChocolateTrain (talk) 17:27, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You keep changing my photos of Hurricane Dorian to more zoomed out photos. It doesn't matter if the photo quality is worse, it matters what the image is projecting and what it means. My photos convey this better as they show the coastline. Normally coastlines wouldn't be accepted except for their landfalls, in which case is important since it shows the islands better. You're images are constantly zoomed out and waste a lot of necessary space on the article.

Please respect others instead of insisting your photos are always better, and please, don't be a jerk. Jayab314 23:56, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

your image is basically a poor quality screenshot and mine is not. FleurDeOdile 14:16, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricane Noah and A1Cafel: Again, it doesn’t matter if the photo quality is worse than yours, it matters what the photo is showing. The only reason I’ve heard for keeping your photos is because it has better quality. Your reasoning screams WP:IDONTLIKEIT and is not valid. My photos show the landfalls better as they have borders and are more zoomed in to the eye, showing more detail. Your photos are zoomed out and waste necessary space in the article.

Please respect others, and please, don't be a jerk. Jayab314 16:40, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As in the title, can you color it correctly? - 👦 07:38, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@FleurDeOdile: Just wanna remind for you. - 👦 12:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

yeah i think i may do it FleurDeOdile 14:23, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from insulting other users in your edit summaries. This is a form of personal attack and is not acceptable on Wikipedia. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:07, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I just want to ask something about this track image I created using the Tropical Cyclone Tracks software on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS.

Do you know how to fix it? I already asked Supportstorm but he doesn't respond again. - 👦 07:50, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. However, what input should I put it on the terminal? I am currently using Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, as an alternative because I also work in tropical cyclone images as you have seen me overwrite it with a better 'science quality data' version. Can you tell me what is the input for centering the track? I am new to the project, as I want to do it. Also, can you assess the error above? (please see Tracks.) - 👦 13:19, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I was just spinning in the 2001 typhoon season article and saw your IBTrACS data of Tropical Storm Fitow. I mean, it is the "biggest clusterfuck of dots of all time". Now, if you see here (http://agora.ex.nii.ac.jp/cgi-bin/weather-chart/search_day.pl?lang=en&year=2001&month=8&day=25) until the end of 30 (18z), you could say that I am conflicted in the TD Jolina infobox that "it was last seen as an exposed surface circulation virtually where it formed on August 21" when the JMA weather maps continued to track Jolina until the storm was last seen as a TD near Taiwan (see day 24, 06z). - 👦 06:17, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please!! I want the code. Supportstorm doesn't reply to my message. Plssss Regards, 👦 13:03, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FleurDeOdile: Regards, 👦 05:54, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

• I noticed a recent edit of yours (namely, a change of an inofbox's image) appeared to be unnecessarily inflammatory towards another user. Some of your recent edits (e.g. [1] and [2]) might also be interpreted in this way, while others are vague or lack explanation (e.g. [3] and [4]). Edit summaries are an important aspect of editing on Wikipedia, particularly in resolving content disputes. See the section §Edit summary dos and don'ts on Wikipedia's Civility policy for a brief summary of what should be avoided in edit summaries, and WP:EDITSUMCITE for a quick overview over what makes a good edit summary. --TheAustinMan^{(Talk ⬩ Edits)} 18:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FleurDeOdile: Did you really just assert here in your edit summary that I should be banned from uploading? That is not really a valid justification for your edit, and is rather contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. I'm not sure why you prefer that image to the original anyway, given how low resolution and zoomed out it is. I am not going to revert your edit given recent events; however, I will contact other editors to see their opinion. Pinging: @Jason Rees, @Hurricanehink

To be honest with you, I'm not so concerned about the image. Of course, I believe your upload has several flaws, but I couldn't really care less about that at the moment. I'm just disappointed with your edit summary and your attitude towards me in general. I am not going to have an argument about it, because it will probably just end up being twisted to be used as more ammunition against me. ChocolateTrain (talk) 20:35, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hate getting involved in these satellite imagery wars and I think Hink is the same as I have no real knowledge about this.Jason Rees (talk) 22:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. ChocolateTrain (talk) 00:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone has a problem with what image is used, remember that it's pretty much pointless, the average reader doesn't care, and if you can't agree on something, then you need to discuss it on a talk page and not in an edit summary. I don't believe anyone involved here should lose the privileges of uploading images. There are so few of us editing TC articles. We need to get along and make our edits productive. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:29, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FleurDeOdile: I can't believe that I really have to engage in yet another disagreement with you about image selection, but I feel that it is warranted in the Ferdinand situation to prevent any more pointless reversions. I believe your preferred image, namely File:Ferdinand 2020-02-26 0605Z.jpg, is inferior to the original image, namely File:Ferdinand 2020-02-26 0608Z.jpg. The most pressing reason for this is the excessively small portion of the image that the cyclone occupies in your upload. By my rough estimation (assuming a circular system with a total CDO and banding radius equal to approximately 15% of the image width), the cyclone takes up only 5% of the image area, given a 4:3 aspect ratio. This is far too small. Looking at the image, it is effectively impossible to discern any details of the cloud structure and shape other than simply that it is white and roughly circular. The 0608Z image, which I prefer and uploaded originally, shows details like cloud texture and altitude to some extent, and shows more clearly that the eye is not circular. There is no reason to have the cyclone take up such a small portion of the image, when the sole purpose of the image is to show what the cyclone looks like. Although our situation is not as extreme, the first bullet point here, the point regarding subject size in the preceding plain text, as well as the photo in the previous subsection, illustrate a starker example of what I am trying to explain. I should also note that your image is timestamped incorrectly, as the Aqua satellite passed over the cyclone at 06:08 UTC rather than 06:05 UTC, contrary to the indication in your image's title.

It is not necessarily my place to comment on your editing history, but given a cursory perusal of your editing statistics, perhaps it would be useful and rewarding for you to consider diversifying your contributions to Wikipedia, and to clash less with editors on the topic of images. ChocolateTrain (talk) 03:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) FleurDeOdile: I encourage you to engage in the discussion ChocolateTrain is facilitating here. By my count, the two of you have overriden each other's image eight times, including the latest instance which occurred well after ChocolateTrain opened dialogue above, not to mention the several changes on the file itself. All of these changes have also been done without noting the change in edit summaries. @ChocolateTrain: I know these have largely been two-sided affairs, but I would suggest in future instances to bring image discussions to the article's talk page rather than on user talk pages to foster further discussion and better gauge consensus on the article itself.

The two images have their positives, but ideally I think a compromise between the two images would be best. I think the best tropical cyclone images are ones that provide sufficient context: they satisfactorily illustrate the storm's intensity, appearance, and surrounding the geographic context—all three of those facets. The 0605z image does a better job at the last point, showing more of the surrounding landmasses, while the 0608z handles the first two better, since we don't want the subject matter to be so small relative to the image. I would suggest a crop about midway between the two, perhaps with just part of Sumba in view. —TheAustinMan^{(Talk ⬩ Edits)} 00:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I saw you redirected the article for Cyclone Herold without any discussion. May I ask, how come? The article is on the shorter side, sure, but the storm still killed five people, affected two different countries, and was pretty impactful for Madagascar. It's not the best article, sure, but it's an article made by a new user, and I'm trying to encourage new users to try making articles, even if they're not perfect. There's a reason we have start-class articles. Eventually they can be improved by other users. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Namely, THIS new user! 🐔Chicdat (talk) 11:48, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A wake-up call for you. I'm gonna revert it. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tropical_cyclones/Tracks#No_IBTrACS) Regards, 👦 05:47, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been warned multiple times over the last several months about your inappropriate behavior, particularly with edit summaries, and this is your final such warning. Recent examples: [5], [6], [7]. I gave you a warning myself in November, you received a second warning in February, and ChocolateTrain complained later that month. A lack of responses to these messages leaves me to believe you have no intention of changing your behavior. If you continue attacking other editors through summaries or messages, you will be blocked for a period of time. Please refer to Wikipedia:Civility on how to appropriately interact with other users on the site. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the problem is that all of this is caused by all of users that trigger me (IPs, vandals and F13 followers). and combined with anger issues causes that. i honestly need a break from WP for a long while (not necessarily i need to be banned). FleurDeOdile 21:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's understandable that things can get frustrating, that's comes with trying to maintain the site. But when that frustration builds, you have to take a step back before reacting. Things don't have to be accomplished immediately here, so taking time to think things through is not a problem at all. Discussions are a core element of Wikipedia, that's how disputes are resolved here. In the case of not believing Irondro warrants an article, the best course of action would be to start a discussion on the talk page and ping (using {{ping|user}}) the editors involved. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 21:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have once again reverted an edit without providing an explanation. This is contrary to Wikipedia policy and is unacceptable. ChocolateTrain (talk) 04:26, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note that if you fail to provide an adequate explanation for this reversion, or any reversion in the future, the previous version will be restored. You cannot continue to flout policy and revert non-vandal edits without explanation simply because you feel like it. You need to be accountable for your actions. ChocolateTrain (talk) 06:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to reply to my message, or simply ignore it like the other times I've called you out on this behaviour? ChocolateTrain (talk) 05:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I know that you have reverted me twice regarding TD Ambo's image in the current infobox. But is the reason because the image name and quality is not that good since it has been made by a relatively new user? I will agree with that, though. Apologies if I couldn't create a new image earlier but at least the geostationary images will be up as soon as it is designated. Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you just going to keep removing the COVID section on 2020 Atlantic hurricane season without providing an explanation? You have not said anything at all on why you keep removing it. I for one think it needs to be there considering the season could be one of the most difficult seasons we’ve been through, because of the pandemic and potentially active season forecasted too. So please stop, or I may have to report you if you keep this up. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 23:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How active the season may be is of little importance. Nevertheless, I don't have a problem with the content but the lead sees like a weird place for the information. Perhaps the seasonal predictions section? YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can i ask a question? What makes some random mayor of a city in some US State so notable, that his views about Covid and the hurricane season are represented in the AHS? Especially at a time when the TC warning system was being tested in the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and Tonga by Cyclone Harold. I would also be curious to see if his views has changed since. Dont get me wrong though, I think some stuff to covid is relevant to all of the season articles, but it has to be in a balanced way.Jason Rees (talk) 01:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@FleurDeOdile:, if you keep removing content from articles without adequately explaining why, I might have to report you at ANI. Just saying... 🐔Chicdat ^ChickenDatabase 10:48, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I was just coming to this page to post the same thing. @FleurDeOdile:, can you explain your content removal in this edit? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. [8] shows you just redirected without any procedure beforehand. Don’t do that please. There is also word you’re removing stuff related to COVID (which has effects on tropical cyclone disaster management) from TC articles. ...yeah. AC5230 talk 17:18, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked this account for 72 hours in response to your persistent disruptive editing–ownership of article content, edit warring, WP:IDHT behavior, and general refusal to cooperative. Please take this time to review Wikipedia's guidelines and policies on collaborative editing and building consensus. If you feel this block was in error you may appeal it by following the instructions at WP:APB. Thank you. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the 2020 Pacific hurricane season article, you removed a mention that travel restrictions were lifted and stores were opened at partial capacity amid the pandemic to allow people to prepare for Amanda. That is directly related and it's not ambiguous. You have been told by multiple editors now, including when you and I had an extensive chat on IRC, that coronavirus mentions are notable and worthy of addition. If you truly believe your viewpoint is the correct one and you can persuade everybody else, bring the topic up on a talk page. Otherwise, these edits are nothing but disruptive. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 17:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

it has absolutely nothing to do with TCs and this is a TC-only project. not a virus one FleurDeOdile 17:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it impacts how people access supplies and prepare for a tropical cyclone, it is very clearly related... TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk · contributions) 17:45, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FleurDeOdile, you protest to everything, even to the point of being blocked, with merely saying, "This is a TC-only project, not a virus one." But it is a virus one if it does in how @TropicalAnalystwx13: says it. And could you possibly explain why Tropical Storm Arthur (2020) was redirected with the mere edit summary DO NOT REVERT? If the edit summary was more specific, it might have not been immediately reverted. Thanks, 🐔 Chicdat ^ChickenDatabase 10:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is File:SD4 2020-06-22 Terra.jpg a garbage image? The seam? The Aqua pass hasn't happened yet but this image seems certainly fine for now - it's more up-to-date than the image from yesterday, which also has a visible seam. I don't understand the flat-out removal of the image. Jokullmusic 21:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, you may be blocked from editing. If you think information on Tropical Depression Seven is poorly written, why don't you edit it and improve it. Stop being mean to IPs and Weatherman27 and deleting content. Your negative attitude toward other editors as shown from previous edit summaries and your previous edits needs to stop. If you continue to do that, I will report you. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 21:25, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:FleurDeOdile reported by User:Destroyeraa (Result: ). Thank you. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 14:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop taking ownership of pages. This is why editors have threatened to report you/block you. Please reflect on your actions. Thanks, and stay safe. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 14:16, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good call removing the Tropical Storm Isaias article when the storm wasn't even named nor was noteworthy at the time. Just wanted to commend you as usually we're angry at you so I decided to give you some credit. ~ AC5230 talk 23:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom's gonna have my head on a stick for this. I'm sorry, Fleur. ~ AC5230 talk 23:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please give me a reason why you took off the Hagupit Suomi NPP image from the Typhoon Hagupit (2020) link in Wikimedia Commons? This really wasn't necessary, but very disappointing. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:05, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One person spoiled the article of the 2020 Northern Indian Ocean cyclone season and please take action on it. Janm 7 (talk) 08:49, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to 2020 Pacific hurricane season, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Your reversion at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020_Pacific_hurricane_season&diff=973324266&oldid=973322905 which removed a paragraph for Fausto (that would otherwise need better formatting (just do that instead!)) was not particularly the best course of action and ESPECIALLY w/ it having no edit summary is just explicitly... goodness. I quote User:Jasper Deng on IRC whom to which you must answer: "what did I say about reverting others without edit summaries?" You've done this before. Don't do it again. Thank you, ~ AC5230 talk 20:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at 2020 Atlantic hurricane season, you may be blocked from editing. Why did you remove the records subsection. it’s there for a reason. Saying it’s spam isn’t a viable reason. One more time and I will report you. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 01:31, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For doing all the storm tracks and storm images. It probably takes a lot of work! Good job.

~ Destroyeraa🌀 17:34, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I reverted the wrong edit it was just a mistake fyi. But is there by any chance you could resize your other Paulette image to perhaps take off the line at the top right corner? Typhoon2013 (talk) 21:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be nice for you to give a valid explanation via a talk page or perhaps an edit summery instead of reverting with no reason and doing it in a wrong way by saying in a side not to not use an alternative image? Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:17, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I personally think it would do FDO some good if he was blocked for another 72 hours. An IP has raised a complaint at Talk:Tropical cyclone effects in Europe for Fleur's reversion of all of Subtropical Storm Alpha's section in the article! This means that the third Atlantic hurricane to make landfall in Europe — and the first storm to do so since 1842 — doesn't even get a mention in Tropical cyclone effects in Europe. If I hadn't agreed to a voluntary administrative restriction (that is, until I get three featured articles... or maybe twenty-seven ), then FleurDeOdile would already be at ANI. 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 10:50, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I believe the image you removed from Teddy was not poor quality so I will revert it back. Ty! Robloxsupersuperhappyface (talk) 01:22, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same for Vicky! Thank you. Typhoon2013 (talk) 00:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

On the new Gamma satellite pic you added (replacing mine :(), the file name says 2020-09-03. It’s October!!

~ Destroyeraa🌀 23:57, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

lmao im too stupid to pretend its not september FleurDeOdile 00:00, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to tell you something, Fleur.

Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes. Do not revert image changes.

More? No? 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 10:16, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I used to have a trouble with this in 2017, it's about Hurricane Harvey. My preferred image is the one which is used today, but in order to get that thing, it took me pains. Please, you'll need to discuss first before reverting image changes. Chicdat is right. SMB99thx my edits 11:48, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SMB99thx: I'm afraid he won't listen. If he's ever listened to any advice, regarding imgs, edit-wars, or otherwise, I'll request a thousand-day block for my stupidness. 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 12:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chicdat: Chill. Please. It's getting to the point of WP:ABF for both of you. Don't spam please. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 13:53, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'm sorry to everyone. 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 10:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Fleur. Correct me if I am wrong but I just want to say thanks for helping keeping updated with the geostationary images towards the Atlantic (and maybe PHS) basin articles. But maybe to save your time and effort as well, since I started doing this recently in the Wpac geo images, but to just use the designation number instead for the name? As for instance with "Epsilon Geostationary VIS-IR 2020", it would be replaced with 27L instead. Back then when we only have a designation then it strengthens into a named storm, we have to request to change and update the file name. Moreover the geo images in a season have a mix of the storm names and storm designations. Just a heads up. Have a good day, though. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The National Hurricane Center is still updating the post tropical storm, next update is at 5PM (EST). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:FleurDeOdile reported by User:MarioProtIV (Result: ). Thank you. MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 17:55, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FleurDeOdile. You've been reported for edit warring, but you've made no response. It looks like you are making similar reverts at a number of articles in favor of the image you prefer, File:Eta 2020-11-03 0355Z.jpg. To avoid sanctions it would be advisable for you to respond and promise to wait for consensus about the image. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:38, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank you firstly on continuing a great job with TC images especially with the geostationary images in the Atlantic. Just a question, are you getting the images from the NRL website? Because if so I am wondering why your images are in a .jpg file instead of a .png file. Typhoon2013 (talk) 01:36, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. To be unblocked, any reasonable proposal for how you could act differently in the future might be considered. You were blocked 72 hours for similar reasons back in May 2020 but the complaints on your talk page suggest that no improvement occurred as a result. EdJohnston (talk) 19:06, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, he will likely not acknowledge anything even then. But I cannot speak for Fleur. But here's a FINAL warning to you, Fleur: Change your ways or you will be no longer welcome here. ~ AC5230 talk 19:15, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly advise Fleur to seek WP:Mentorship from an experienced editor on how to better handle themselves on the site. If they agree to do so, the block may be rescinded early but additional personal attacks/harassment of other users and/or edit warring will result in an even longer block. Incivility has been a chronic issue with Fleur and they have shown little care toward correcting this behavior. There is a desire to work within the project from what I've seen, but the manner in which they have gone about it over the least year or more has not been acceptable. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 02:51, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Welcome back to Wikipedia HurricaneEdgar 00:54, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

𝙲𝚘𝚍𝚒𝚗𝚐𝙲𝚢𝚌𝚕𝚘𝚗𝚎 ᴛᴀʟᴋ 01:55, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

==Happy New Year!==

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

@FleurDeOdile: I wish to talk about your frequent removal of valid data from the 2020–21 Australian region cyclone season article. I appreciate that you don't seem to think the JTWC has classified the season's tropical lows as tropical depressions, but this assertion is simply false, as I've pointed out numerous times, and yet you continue to ignore it. Along with the one-minute sustained wind speed, the tropical depression designation is quite clearly indicated in the JTWC track files for the relevant systems. As I have also mentioned, the JTWC—as written on their website—is a branch of the United States Navy whose purpose is to provide warnings on severe tropical meteorological threats to agencies of the US government. You should notice that there are several products that the JTWC only issues for systems in the western North Pacific Ocean, including prognostic reasoning messages, three-hourly position update products and numbered warnings for systems with sustained winds of 23–33 knots (below tropical storm threshold). As directly stated on their website, "Per JTWC directive, prognostic reasoning messages are only required for the western North Pacific, where there are increased U.S. Government asset concerns." This point about the northwestern Pacific having more US government assets (e.g. navy and air force bases) is one that I have also mentioned–and has been ignored–several times. Furthermore, "JTWC initiates tropical cyclone warnings when... estimated maximum sustained wind speeds within a closed tropical circulation meet or exceed a designated threshold of 25 knots in the North Pacific Ocean or 35 knots in the South Pacific and Indian Oceans," as I have explained previously. Thus, the reason you don't see products on tropical depressions in the Australian region is because the JTWC does not operationally issue numbered warnings on these systems due to a lack of US government assets there, and not because the system somehow isn't a tropical depression. I really hope this is the last time I have to explain this. ChocolateTrain (talk) 07:15, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ChocolateTrain: JTWC does not produce final best tracks for such systems that don't get classified, and invest numbers repeatedly roll over, so there is no way for us to source these numbers in the same way we can point to track files of classified systems. FleurDeOdile is right to do what they're doing here. Also, you really need to work on being less overly verbose; this could've been explained in half the words or less.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasper Deng: Archived operational track files are sufficient for non-TS strength systems. Also, I know I've mentioned this to you in the past, but you one can't make a good argument if you don't one doesn't include any evidence–otherwise it's just my word against theirs. ChocolateTrain (talk) 07:33, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When did I not include any evidence? I literally just pointed out that archived operational track files are not sufficient in general because of the reuse of invest numbering. There will be multiple 90S's and/or 90P's this season, for example. When a new invest is needed, the old ones' track is overwritten. Also, JTWC is not consistent in classifying these systems as TD, sometimes using DB instead. There is a strong project consensus against using these 1-minute numbers, so you will have to bring this up at WT:WPTC if you want any hope of changing this practice, not one of our talk pages.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:47, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ackk, I saw something changed on the season article that led me over to this page. Only have the info from JTWC for designated systems (01P, 02S, 03S, 04P, etc). Invests don't count.--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 07:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jasper Deng: I never said anything about you not including evidence. I was talking in general terms about how arguments are written. I have now changed the wording above to make it clearer. Incidentally, avoiding ambiguity and minsunderstanding like this is exactly why it is prudent to not sacrifice clarity for conciseness. Anyway, your point about overwriting track files is irrelevant, since we can simply archive them for future use. There are dates and times for each data point contained in the track file, so there is no risk of confusing invests with the same designation. And yes, the JTWC actually is consistent in their classifications. In the future please ping me when replying, because I am not a talk-page stalker because I think it's unhelpful. ChocolateTrain (talk) 09:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ChocolateTrain and Jasper Deng: As one of the main SHEM editors, this is one issue that I hate with the JTWC in the SHEM as they won't call anything a tropical depression publically (The ECMWF/NOAA BT files are not public per say and do not supersede the Significant Tropical Weather Advisories). I will note that though we could in theory, have a situation where NOAA (NWS Pago Pago) issues warnings on a tropical depression that is expected to intensify into a tropical cyclone and impact American Samoa. Now bearing in mind that NOAA wants to use 1-min winds worldwide, I would think that it would be perfectly valid to call it a tropical depression on the SSHWS.Jason Rees (talk) 19:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JTWC does not reanalyze these systems though and doesn't put data in IBTRACS. I also do not think CT is entitled to pings; that's what watchlists are for.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting the Vicky image again occasionally without an explanation is quite sneaky. Typhoon2013 (talk) 20:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

you literally reverted it with no explanation FleurDeOdile 21:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fleur. Since you are doing a great job with the TC images, I was wondering if you can create an Ana image similar to Hurricaneboys but without the line? I placed a temporary image there from Suomi NPP. Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Despite not my image, it is pretty unfair to propose a deletion for an image you claim to be is "garbage". It is not your decision, and hence I opposed. Reasonings like that are a big yikes, and only stating "low quality image" for a deletion is kinda useless when you did not mention how it was low-quality. What about the other "low quality images"? Otherwise why propose a deletion when you can make it better? Please not that NO ONE's image is superior than others. Anyhow would like to thank @DachshundLover82: for bringing that up too in the article talk page. Typhoon2013 (talk) 22:00, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I may like to add that cursing at confused people is extremely rude. I would suggest you make calmer edit summaries as opposed to using swear words. Also, calling every image "garbage" doesn’t help Wikipedia at all. Please be kinder here on Wikipedia.DachshundLover82 (talk) 01:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at 2020 Pacific typhoon season shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
You really ought to know better than this, yet you chose to revert without even bothering to use an edit summary. This pattern of poor communication has been going on long enough. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:06, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The noticeboard discussion was closed. Please remember to behave civilly (point no. 7 on my userpage). 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hurricaneboy23 (page) * (talk) 21:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Jasper Deng (talk) 04:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 05:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this edit, do you have a source that the JTWC classified the system with winds of 35 kt? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

35kt is a generic intensity for it since there is nothing from them FleurDeOdile 20:19, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of if we keep systems that formed between 80E & 90E in Aus or move them to the SWIO. Roma will still need to be made a part of the 1972-73 SWIO season, since it existed to the west of 80E. I would also suggest that you tone down your edit summaries asking me what "the hell are you on?" are not very civil, when all I have done is made a good-faith edit.Jason Rees (talk) 23:24, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Roma briefly existed west of 80E but there is no MFR BT entry on it in IBTrACS FleurDeOdile 23:35, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the same can be applied to Kristy '85 where it never left 80E (rule was changed next year) yet the season article lists a 55kt C2 FleurDeOdile 23:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There isnt a BoM BT for Roma either, because of the lack of satellite imagery in those days. As for Kirsty 85, the data from IBTRACS shows that it was a Cat 2 inside Aus, before becoming a Cat 5 in between 80 and 90E. Personally I feel that we should be consistant for our readers sake and say that all systems between Africa and 90E are a part of the SWIO, 90 and 160 Aus and 160 and America SPAC. If not then it starts getting messy. Jason Rees (talk) 23:44, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I want you could create a tropical cyclone track. It is tropical cyclone 2, of May, 11th-14th 1983. I have the track but I don't know how to plot it. It's the only tropical cyclone of southeast Pacific, east of 120ºW. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/gibbs/html/GOE-5/IR/1983-05-13-18 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luxin1989 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A few people over there wanted the seasonal map to be updated but the person who normally does it has been inactive. Could you tell us how you make these or make the summary? Mitch199811 (talk) 23:51, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The issue has been corrected. Mitch199811 (talk) 00:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just wondering why you removed my edits as they are from the same source that the other information is from the JTWC. In fact the mbar has now decreased to 1001 according to JTWC: https://www.metoc.navy.mil/jtwc/products/sh9423web.txt, also did I record the wrong wind speed or something because it says 22-28 knots estimated maximum wind speed. Also what is "F13 crap" I'm sorry if I did something wrong and I'll try to make better edits in the future. Hiyouboots (talk) 00:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear project member, This message is being sent out to encourage new ideas and feedback on those proposed in regard to the colors debate for WikiProject Weather. For those who are unaware of what's been happening over the last year, I will give a brief summary. We have been discussing proposed changes to the colors of the dots on tropical cyclone maps and templates and infoboxes across the entire weather project in order to solve issues related to the limited contrast between colors for both normal vision as well as the various types of color blindness (MOS:ACCESS). We had partially implemented a proposal earlier this year, however, it was objected to by a number of people and additional issues were presented that made it evident this wasn't the optimal solution. We tried to come up with other solutions to address the issues related to color contrast, however, none of them gained traction and no consensus was generated.

We need your help and I encourage you to propose your own scale and give feedback on those already listed. Keep in mind that we are NOT making a decision on any individual proposal at this time. We are simply allowing people to make proposals and cultivate them given feedback from other project members. Please visit our project page for additional details. The proposal phase will close no later than December 31st at 23:59 UTC. Noah^Talk 03:22, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Cyclones Judy and Kevin shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/Color RfC was clear and firm. You cannot override it just because WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Jasper Deng (talk) 02:15, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say that we shouldn't follow off-wiki wider TC Wikia and F13 community. They operate in different manner than us and has been the reason why WikiProject Tropical Cyclones got into ARBCom. I tried to integrate and adapt with these people, but they don't conform once it comes to consensus-making, not to mention protests from the older WPTC members pre-2013. MarioJump83 (talk) 06:17, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#FleurDeOdile Cross-wiki edit warring. Thank you. Noah^Talk 03:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#FleurDeOdile Off-wiki Canvassing & Cross-wiki Edit Warring and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Noah^Talk 04:25, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would just like to emphasize that indefinite does not mean infinite and so there are definitely ways you can write a successful appeal of this block. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:03, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, I discovered several articles documenting the formation of an "extremely rare tropical cyclone" in the Southeast Pacific basin, near Peru, and unofficially named by the tracking agency as " Yaku". Should it be added to the South Pacific cyclone season? Vệ Thần ^{- Talk} 23:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FleurDeOdile,

The Arbitration Committee has declined the FleurDeOdile Off-wiki Canvassing & Cross-wiki Edit Warring case request, but you have been blocked by a checkuser; see the block notification above for details.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]