Category talk:Hurricanes in California

No Such Thing

How can there be a category titled "California hurricanes" when there have never been ANY? It's absurd. Even if we accept that a single storm in 1858 was actually a hurricane (that hurricane's status as a "hurricane" is unsettled, based on very thin historical information; it was most likely an extratropical storm that had previously been a hurricane, and in any case, it never made landfall), this would be a category of ONE. Tmangray 02:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit ridiculous to deny the 1858 storm as a hurricane and then claim it as extratropical. Extratropical storms are typically quite weak in San Diego in October, and no extratropical storm has ever produced winds of this strength in the instrumented history of the location.

I think it's reasonable to call this page "California hurricanes." Kathleen, which was supposedly down to depression strength when it entered California, was clearly of strong tropical storm strength, and was very close to minimal hurricane status when it entered the Imperial Valley. I guess it depends on whether you see the US government as the final adjudicator of which tropical systems are hurricanes. Honestly, NOAA never had good handle on what was going on with Kathleen and their classification is now seen to be in error. --Pegminer 15:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

This category should be renamed "California tropical cyclones". This category sounds like hurricane envy, a ridiculous competition with other places which actually have hurricanes.Tmangray 19:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

• Strange that there are several named hurricanes in the category with the articles explaining that they were hurricanes. Thanks Hmains 02:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It isn't the "hurricane" part that is factually false, but the "California" part. Not one California hurricane. It's this sort of thing which brings discredit on Wikipedia. Tmangray 04:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)