Talk:Cyclone Sidr

GFDL

This is a copy and paste of the section in 2007 North Indian Ocean cyclone season and is a GFDL violation, so this version will need to be replaced somehow. --Coredesat 02:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Fixed it with a dummy edit, which makes it a valid split. It should be good to go now. --Coredesat 03:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Intensity

http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tropic/adt/odt06B.html

How the heck can there be such a great difference in intensity??? Anung Mwka 03:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The intensity is very much disputed, with ranges between 100 kt and 145 kt (and pressure differences from 891 to 956 - I personally believe it is around 900-905). IMD is the official source for the region and is the primary one listed, even if they are obviously wrong. JTWC is used for data not provided by IMD (i.e. the category). CrazyC83 04:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The BBC knows nothing

The article says that Sidr was a Cat 5 with winds of 155 mph with a BBC source. Cat 5 begins at 156mph, requiring 140kts to be designated Cat 5. Neither the JTWC nor the IMD ever got that high. -- RattleMan 16:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

That's correct. 135 kt was the JTWC peak intensity - high-end Cat 4. CrazyC83 22:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

In Indian media, the cyclone is decalred Cat 5. What to do? Indianescence (talk)

There is nothing to do. Its peak intensity was 135 knots (1-minute) which is cat 4. ---CWY2190^TC 06:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

We need a little more clarification here. Please provide. Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh (talk) 11:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

JTWC warnings are unofficial but often used by the media. At one point they (JTWC) estimated Sidr's intensity at 135 knots - the maximum threshold for a Category 4 storm. Their estimates are also compatible with the Saffir-Simpson hurricane scale since they measure maximum sustained winds in 1-minute averages (of course the difference between IMD and JTWC should be insignificant, but there's clearly something wrong at the former). Anyway, as far as this article is concerned, Sidr was a Category 4 storm. They probably should've pulled the trigger and made it a Category 5 since there is evidence it was for at least 18 hours. They could still change that when they release their report on Sidr. Good kitty (talk) 19:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Good kitty! --Tarif from Bangladesh (talk) 04:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Current tags

This is a current event as long as it is listed on WP:ITN, Portal:Current events, and the Main Page; please do not remove the {{current}} and current-class tags from this article until it is off ITN/the Main Page. --Coredesat 08:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks to all my friends here at Wiki for helping in this article. We had a complete blackout after the day of Cyclone and did not have any chance to contribute. I didn't even have enough charge in my battery to pick a photo of an uprooted tree in Dhaka due to Sidr. I'm kind of busy now for my University admission. I'll try to contribute as soon as I'm free. Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

killed by winds

....... the deaths confirmed thus far were due to the winds...

The paragraph fails to elaborate on how the winds led to death —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.167.38.43 (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

$130 million donation

• [1] - An anonymous donor will be donating $130 million in aid to Bangladesh. As it hasn't happened yet, it shouldn't be in the article (or should it?), but once it happens, it should go in. This is a notice to look for any updates in the story. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont understand why in "International Response' page, India's aid is written in so many lines and looks like its as India's article and India's problem. Look at the part again.

India sent an emergency relief package of essential commodities and waived ban on export by sending 500,000 tonnes of rice to Bangladesh. Mukherjee also unveiled the model of the 2,800 core shelters on February 9, 2009, which India would be constructing soon in the 11 villages affected by this cyclone.

Why there is talk about Mukherjee  ??? Is this an article about India's relief to other countries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.175.160.131 (talk) 20:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

If there is a lot about India don't remove it!!!, instead, add more about the other countries, as there is no point in removing content, that is a waste of time. (hint hint nudge nudge wink wink) --Anhamirak 20:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

International Response and India's part as written

I dont understand why in "International Response' page, India's aid is written in so many lines and looks like its as India's article and India's problem. Look at the part again.

India has provided Bangladesh aid including cash assistance of $10 million, essential items including rice and milk powder worth $40 million. In the aftermath of the 2007 cyclone, India sent an emergency relief package of essential commodities and waived ban on export by sending 500,000 tonnes of rice to Bangladesh. Mukherjee also unveiled the model of the 2,800 core shelters on February 9, 2009, which India would be constructing soon in the 11 villages affected by this cyclone.

Firs it goes, India has provided..... Later is said again, In the aftermath of the 2007 cyclone.......then again , Mukherjee also unveiled. What is this ?? Is this an article about India's relief to other countries? or its an article about a Cyclone that did not hit India and India is not one of biggest donner of that cyclone. Besides all those information are from india's newspaper.

this was removed, so I am bringing it backIf there is a lot about India don't remove it!!!, instead, add more about the other countries, as there is no point in removing content, that is a waste of time. (hint hint nudge nudge wink wink) --Anhamirak 20:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

For a real list of International aid please refer to this link [2]

In this UN aid, its seen, India not even provide the money with a commitment. She was one of the lowest donner. at least 50 countries provide more aid then India. If we want to keep NPOV we have to write articles based on real stuff. I strongly suggest to rerite this 'internatinal response" based on UN aid list of cyclone Sidr which can be found in this link. ocha.unog.ch/fts/reports/daily/ocha_R10_E15382_asof___0908260205.pdf and not based on an Indian newspaper.

Do you have something against India being in this article or something? I'm really getting irritated at your continued attempts to remove perfectly useful information. If you feel that there is too much information from India, add more from other countries. Not to be rude, but if you only want to complain and remove information, this site is not for you. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Whoever you are , either you did not read what i wrote or u r blind to see. if u r in abroad, ask someone non-indian to read 'international response' and whats his feeling. The point i am trying to eastablish is that, india's part is written in an exaggerate way which easily will misconfuse someone else who is not connected. As indian ofourse u dont see any wrong in the article and again, ask your foreigner friend to read the article and ask his/her response. And stop saying which article is for who, you are not in that position with wikipedia where it has to be NPOV. this article now is not NPOV. you can be irritated with the truth but then again your line goes back to you. stay your home if u dont want to be irritated with truth. Once again, follow this link to get the UN AID LIST and see comapre the india's aid and other countries aid. then read again the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.175.160.131 (talk) 20:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

First off, with the obscure and irrelevant statement I have to say you're actually wrong, I'm from the United States and secondly my background has nothing to do with the article. The article is not close to being a complete as it can be so there is obviously a lot of information missing. The section of the article in question is actually what I've written myself and do not accuse me of holding information back. I will give you a single warning for this since you have already vandalized the article before. Your latest offense, a personal attack, is not tolerated on this site whatsoever and if you continue this behavior you will be blocked. Since this is a site anyone can edit, there is no need for you to argue with us about adding useful information, just click the edit button and type away. As I said before, this is your only warning for your disruptive edits and administrators will be notified if this continues. Concerning some of your other comments, I have read the article and I can easily see that this article has no main focus on India, it's focused on Bangladesh. Also, why are you complaining so much about three sentences? You have taken this way out of proportion and this conversation really isn't necessary at all. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello cyclone,

Let me rewrite you the KSA part in india's way and look how it sounds: Saudi Arabis has provided Bangladesh aid including cash assistance of $100 million, essential items including Dates and Camel milk worth $40 million. In the aftermath of the 2007 cyclone, Saudi Arabia sent an emergency relief package of essential commodities and waived ban on export by sending 500,000 tonnes of Dates to Bangladesh. King Abdullah also unveiled the model of the 2,800 core shelters on February 9, 2009, which the kingdom would be constructing soon in the 11 villages affected by this cyclone. King Abduallh's son has provided with 50 more tonnes relief. Khalid bin walid has also provided additional more reliefs.

how this KSA article will sound to anyone ? Who is mukarjee? why we have to know about mulkharjee on a cyclone article? Dont use the word 'warning'. come up with your point if u got any. If you really do not see any wrong with article, then think of writing the article for all countries exactly as its written for india. think again how rediculous it will sound. we have to learn who is mukarjee, khalid bin walid, oabama's relief minister ... and at last the article will not be on international response what it was intended to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.175.160.131 (talk) 21:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Time for me to jump in - There is nothing wrong with how the aftermath section is it just needs more details adding which is what Anharmik and CB were trying to tell you. Also IMO 3 sentences of Indian aftermath is too little since there is a lot more aftermath out there since it was directly affected by the cyclone. I have also read the article and i can not see why you are moaning, abou 3 sentences. Jason Rees (talk) 22:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for you coming. One last thing, this is an "international repsonse". Can we rewrite this part with an internatinal source like UN? Here is the link for that ocha.unog.ch/fts/reports/daily/ocha_R10_E15382_asof___0908260205.pdf . This link will give exact truth which country contribute what amount as aid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.175.174.202 (talk) 22:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

The UN isnt the best source for which country contributes wat but im sure someone will sort it out. Also please sign youre posts with 4 tides Jason Rees (talk) 22:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

217.175.174.202 (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)Do you wanna say indian newspaper is better source then UN source ? To be clear, The part is based on indian newspaper and I am proposing to rewrite it with UN source.

Use both because the UN omits certain things. Jason Rees (talk) 22:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

217.175.175.26 (talk) 22:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC) Great. To all friends, I will rewrite the part mainly based on international sources like UN, Reuters etc in coming few days and all international link will be included, any persons name like any PM, Presidnt, Relief Minister name will not be included unless he / she visited the area or made some significant contribution to aid program. Thanks and regards.

217.175.160.131 (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC) The 'International Response' part is rewritten now with a NPOV point of view and a NPOV source. I could not find any information in reuter or couldnt find any direct contribution to aid on anywhere. if anyone finds, please add it with relevance significane and please keep it NPOV but not someone's personal beliefs POV. Thanks again.

217.175.160.131 (talk) 19:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)--Anhamirak 20:27: Do you have any problem? Why you undo the part? If you have any disputed point , come here. Discuss. Its wikipedia, not AnhamirakPedia. Tell me what is your problem ?

The format seemed better in words when I was editing it, I was using WP:Rollback so I was not able to put that in the edit summary. By the way, could you please use better referencing and gramamar too? --Anhamirak 19:24, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

217.175.160.131 (talk) 19:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Thanks for coming here. Lets discuss here first before we come to conclusion what it should be. Please feel free to correct grammars or any other mistakes without compromisisng NPOV. I agree words looks better then chart but a NPOV chart is better in every ways then controversial beautiful words. In future, I will try to find more information and will add (not compromising NPOV). In another subject, 90% of all these promised international aid did not come to Bangaldesh. I am looking for a reliable source. When found , will be added.

I am also making a table, it is about half-way done, but I think it looks good and it also has references. --Anhamirak 20:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I will finish the table tomorrow and put in the article as I have to go somewhere. --Anhamirak 20:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cyclone Sidr. 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://sonicfighters.com/rattleman/other/053736-cwind.htm

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} 11:12, 4 July 2016 (UTC)