Talk:2009 Pacific hurricane season

Weather: Tropical / Eastern Pacific Mid‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pacific hurricane work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Specialized archives: May, June, July, August, September , October \\ ACE calcs

Other basin talkpages (2009): Atlantic - W. Pacific - Central and East Pacific - N. Indian - S. Hemisphere

Archives

Archive 1

November[edit]

96E.INVEST

Best status from NRL: 30kts 1007 hPa

96E.INVEST first appeared 2009-11-04, 1215z @ 11.0ºN 91.5ºW.

NHC TWO

2009-11-04, 1200z // 1800z

2009-11-05, 0000z // 0600z // 1200z // 1800z

2009-11-06, 0000z // 0600z // 1200z // 1800z

2009-11-07, 0000z // 0600z // 1200z // 1800z

Tropical Cyclone Reports[edit]

Enrique[edit]

Peak intensity upped to 65mph 994mbar due to a mid-level eye feature. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Linda[edit]

Released today, no changes (I think) --Anhamirak 23:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jimena[edit]

Released nearly a week ago, not a cat 5. Ties Norbert (2008) for strongest landfall on Baja Peninsula. --Priyanka 22:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Felicia[edit]

NHC TCR released today, CPHC details included.Jason Rees (talk) 20:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invest 97[edit]

Why did you delete it? It existed! I didn't ahve any time to cite, as it was 16E by the time I got back on! Mad Syntheticalconnections (talk) 00:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We don't put invests on the main article, they're not tropical cyclones Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:18, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

16E formed on 430 PDT September 16 and you edited it at about 554 PDT September 15. Darren 23 ^{My Contributions} 00:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Wikipedia isn't as good as it could be... Syntheticalconnections (talk) 06:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not including unimportant wisps of clouds is precisely what makes Wikipedia as good as it can be. We don't include invests because they are not notable. That they could become notable is irrelevant. --Golbez (talk) 16:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't put something in before it is actually confirmed. We don't put invests and that can be vandalism if you put thing ahead of time without solid official confirmation (which is the NHC or maybe even the NRL/RBT). Darren 23 ^Edits|Mail 12:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only exception to the rule is in other basins when it designated as a Tropical Depression or Tropical Disturbance whilst its an invest.Jason Rees (talk) 17:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, all I'm doing on here is considered bad and all I am trying to do is make it better. I am so glad I have my own wikis... Darren, what if my information is from the NOAA, and they confirmed it? Syntheticalconnections (talk) 03:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because the NHC, the RSMC of the basin does not include it. Also a invest is not a tropical cyclone. --Anhamirak 14:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So? Doesn't mean people can't know about it! Syntheticalconnections (talk) 23:47, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about 2009 East and central Pacific Tropical Cyclones, not whips of small clouds, etc. Darren 23^Edits|Mail 00:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's it. You win. I don't ******* care anymore. So whatever go mancy pansy on your "no invest" ways. What did they ever do to you people... Oh yeah... They grew into crazy storms that whacked into coasts killing many. I guess that doesn't ******* have any significance. Syntheticalconnections (talk) 00:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then why do you post, tropical disturbances, and depressions? THey are totally unorganized! Syntheticalconnections (talk) 01:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We only post tropical disturbances if they become a tropical cyclones. However, I will not have an objection to putting 91E, the 2004 wave, or the July 1999 storm in the season article. Also not all depressions are totally disorganized. . Leave Message, Yellow Evan home

The only places we put disturbances on is in the Shem when they are consider a part of the season down there, Depressions are not invests and as YE correctly put it not all depressions are badly organised at that peak. Also i will have an objection to putting in about "91E, the 2004 wave, or the July 1999 storm" as they are not mnitored as tropical depressions or higher by the NHC or CPHC.Jason Rees (talk) 08:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nora image[edit]

[1], [2] HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 19:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, those images are either blurred or show not all of nora, the current one is high res and should stay. --Anhamirak 19:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge these. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 20:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eighteen-E impacts[edit]

Any impact to southern Mexico, Revillagigedo islands and Baja California? Since it was a large storm. HurricaneSpin Talk My contributions 15:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the impact is minor only, however, I couldn't find impact either. Darren 23^Edits|Mail 16:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Olaf Track[edit]

Can somebody please find it???? I've been looking for it but coundn't find anything!! =( It's missing and the article doesn't look right!! 200.12.34.225 (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will inform a person who makes these WPTC tracks to make one. This might take a while though.Darren 23^Edits|Mail 16:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Theres a backlog at the minute as the most important tracks get done first. Jason Rees (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Patricia is now missing too... Circeus (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please be patient with the tracks. I'm the only person able (and working on wiki) to make these tracks and I do have things to take care of outside of wiki. I'm not always free as I'm in school and have homework and studying to do, which is much more important than wiki. Cheers, Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Rick[edit]

Now that Rick's a Category 5, is there support for an article on the storm? --Dylan 620 (contribs, logs, review) 22:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there is - Me and Darren23 have been urging CB to get on with it, though it may be worth waiting a little longer since there is still a lot to happen.Jason Rees (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a Category 5, some guy added false information to the section. -IrfanFaiz 01:24, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is, please read the NHC update on Rick Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Neki[edit]

Is anyone gonna add a pic of Neki? It's a Cat 2 right now, and expected to reach Cat 3 in 24-36 hr. Hurricanekiller1994 (talk) 15:37, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heading for Category 4 now in its future.. look at this storm strengthen for this time of year - グリフオーザー (talk)

2010 season article[edit]

When would be a good time to create articles for next year's season? This year's season end is only about a week away anyway. Hurricanekiller1994 (talk) 01:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the beginning of the year. No point in having a blank template lying around for more time than necessary. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What, until June 1, 2010? That's a bit long to wait. Or maybe just the beginning of 2010? Say January 1 maybe? Hurricanekiller1994 (talk) 01:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He means 1-1-10 though the WPAC and NIO articles will be created before the 1st.Jason Rees (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so Jan 1. When would be a good time for WPAC? Sometime next month? Hurricanekiller1994 (talk) 01:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the beginning of the year means January 1, 2010.. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probbably about Mid decemeber for the NIO and WPAC ones Jason Rees (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a basic outline for the 2010 WPAC article here: User:Anhamirak/2010 --Priyanka 10:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2009 Pacific hurricane season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Epac_hurr/Epac_hurricane.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://weather.noaa.gov/pub/data/raw/wt/wtpn21.phnc..txt
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20091027/BREAKING01/91027019/Overflight+indicates+Neki+did+minimal+damage+in+Papahanaumokuakea+

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:57, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2009 Pacific hurricane season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Epac_hurr/Epac_hurricane.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629075351/http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/americas/news/article_1485634.php to http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/americas/news/article_1485634.php
Corrected formatting/usage for http://weather.noaa.gov/pub/data/raw/wt/wtpn21.phnc..txt
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722225444/http://www.sicde.gob.mx/portal/bin/notasEstadoPdf.php?estado=Sonora&fecha=2009-10-15 to http://www.sicde.gob.mx/portal/bin/notasEstadoPdf.php?estado=Sonora&fecha=2009-10-15
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20091027/BREAKING01/91027019/Overflight+indicates+Neki+did+minimal+damage+in+Papahanaumokuakea+

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on 2009 Pacific hurricane season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2009/tws/MIATWSEP_aug.shtml
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Epac_hurr/Epac_hurricane.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://weather.noaa.gov/pub/data/raw/wt/wtpn21.phnc..txt
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101218145048/http://mexidata.info/id2402.html to http://mexidata.info/id2402.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723023508/http://www.elimparcial.com/EdicionEnLinea/Notas/Noticias/05092009/400416.aspx to http://www.elimparcial.com/EdicionEnLinea/Notas/Noticias/05092009/400416.aspx
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20091027/BREAKING01/91027019/Overflight%2Bindicates%2BNeki%2Bdid%2Bminimal%2Bdamage%2Bin%2BPapahanaumokuakea%2B

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:11, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2009 Pacific hurricane season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20110819114116/http://kiosko.net/mx/2009-10-15/np/mx_noroeste.html to http://kiosko.net/mx/2009-10-15/np/mx_noroeste.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussions[edit]

Thanks, SMB9 9thx my edits 12:53, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose both. They’re well-developed articles. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 13:08, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also considering merger of Hurricane Fausto (2008) and Hurricane Hernan (2008) to 2008 Pacific hurricane season (this season and that season are not GAs, and I'm using the rationale that four of these articles should be merged into 2008/2009 PHS for future GA effort). Is these articles merge worthy? SMB9 9thx my edits 13:15, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you said now. All four of these articles are pretty well-developed, and it could be pretty disrespectful to merge them all. This is why I have some doubts about merging 01-E 2009 before I started the merge requests. As such, I have withdrawn them all, and I'll go through the other merge requests before entertaining the possibility of returning into this again. SMB9 9thx my edits 14:41, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SMB99thx: No no no no. I am neutral for the TD but I support Blanca merge. GAs can be merged. ~ Destroyeraa🌀 15:56, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To do[edit]

I'm looking to make this GA with the merger of Blanca (2009). Which I should start with? SMB9 9thx my edits 14:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]