Talk:Tropical cyclogenesis

Importance

Seeing as without tropical cyclogenesis, there would be no tropical cyclones, I have raised this article to top-class. --Coredesat talk! 05:20, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

True, but there are other things that you wouldn't have tropical cyclones without - Coriolis force, thunderstorms, etc. CrazyC83 01:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll give you that, but this article discusses the process of tropical cyclone formation. Without the process, there would be no tropical cyclones. The Coriolis force and thunderstorms are just factors in tropical cyclone formation. --Coredesat 02:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Significant update

The references have been changed to be more descriptive. External links have been added at the bottom, which relate to the text. Several images have been added. The page has been reorganized. Thegreatdr 18:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Meter or metre?

I noticed that the spelling of meter was changed in this article. Is metre less POV than meter? Which is used more internationally? If metre is used more often, many TC-related articles need to have this spelling changed to the British spelling. Thegreatdr 18:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter as long as you're consistent. Spelling a word a certain way isn't really POV, since everyone knows there are alternate spellings. --Coredesat (talk) 01:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Just trying avoid a WP:LAME type of problem which comes up on web pages from time to time. Thegreatdr 15:00, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, since you're the one who started the article, you get to pick, per the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Titoxd^(?!?) 03:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Included global stats

Per comments made to the extratropical cyclone article, I realized that the global TS/HU/IH stats were not listed anywhere in this article. Now they are. Thegreatdr 23:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. However, in reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that need to be addressed. I have made minor corrections and have included several points below that need to be addressed for the article to remain a GA. Please address them within seven days and the article will maintain its GA status. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted. If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. To keep tabs on your progress so far, either strike through the completed tasks or put checks next to them.

Needs inline citations:

1. "Although the formation of tropical cyclones is the topic of extensive ongoing research and is still not fully understood, there are six main requirements for tropical cyclogenesis: sufficiently warm sea surface temperatures, atmospheric instability, high humidity in the lower to middle levels of the troposphere, enough Coriolis force to develop a low pressure center, a preexisting low level focus or disturbance, and low vertical wind shear." This is the basis for the entire article, and it would be beneficial to see an inline citation documenting who stated this. Done Thegreatdr (talk) 19:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
2. "Cyclone Agni would come within a mere 40 miles from the Equator in 2004." On the actual article about the cyclone, it mentions fifty miles, so it would be best to add a citation for both of the articles. Done Thegreatdr (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Other issues:

1. This isn't required for GA, but I tagged a few images to be moved to Wikimedia Commons. If you have an account, consider moving the images over.
2. Consider expanding the lead some to better summarize the article.
3. If possible, see if some of the sections can be merged in "Unusual areas of formation". There are too many subsections for the amount of content and would benefit from merging the information together, perhaps by larger regions. Done Thegreatdr (talk) 19:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This article covers the topic well and if the above issues are addressed, I believe the article can remain a GA. I will leave the article on hold for seven days, but if progress is being made and an extension is needed, one may be given. I will leave messages on the talk pages of the main contributors to the article along with related WikiProjects so that the workload can be shared. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Added an important line to the lead as well. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: Pass

I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. Altogether the article is well-written and looks good after addressing the above issues. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 07:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no process narrative

This article contains a great deal of detail about various elements that contribute to cyclogenesis.

But nowhere in this article is a simple narrative which describes the basic process.

As...

Conditions A B C exist

Causing phenomenon D to take place

Which results in phenomena E F G(?)

Which are affected by condition H

After which point a tropical cyclone exists.

Non-meteorologists need this.

--Rich Rostrom (Talk) 23:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

We have a section concerning the six criteria needed for tropical cyclone development. Sometimes the process is not straightforward, and there are different ways that genesis could occur. I wish it were as simple as you suggest. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Length of lead

The lead of the article had been shortened too much. I added more information to it. Remember that the lead of a wikipedia article is supposed to be a general summation of what lies below. In other words, an article summary. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:53, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Agni

Agni holds no record about being the closest system to develop near the equator - The IMD BT shows that it developed nr 1.5N 66.0E and moved up.Jason Rees (talk) 18:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Contradiction

I do see a contradiction.
"Although El Niño does not impact the number of tropical cyclones in the Western North Pacific, El Niño shifts their formation, as cyclones form farther to the east than normal. Near the International Date Line on both sides of the equator, there is a net increase in tropical cyclone development during El Niño."

Simply put, the article is saying "El Nino doesn't impact the number of TC's in WPAC, there is an increase in TC's in the Pacific (including the WPAC)". Makes no sense. atomic7732 23:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I think that what it is saying is that El Niño shifts formation of storms in the WPAC towards the CPAC and EPAC, but that overall, those storms end up in the WPAC anyways, so the number of storms that circulate in the WPAC remains constant. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 00:56, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Still needs re-wording then. atomic7732 01:24, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

There that's alot better. atomic7732 03:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

But this is not true, storms that form in the CPAC and EPAC rarely make it all the way to the WPAC. In fact I'm pretty sure there isnot one documented instance of an EPAC storm traversing the entire Pacific Ocean to the WPAC, so I am still confused. TimL (talk) 22:07, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

My mistake, I should have read the article as-is first, and it makes sense to me. TimL (talk) 22:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tropical cyclogenesis/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Not really sure what to do... perhaps send to peer review for more input? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 19:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 09:18, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tropical cyclogenesis. 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.metsul.com/blog/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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} 11:39, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Tropical cyclogenesis. 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://web.archive.org/web/20060830135741/http://www.nsidc.org:80/arcticmet/glossary/cyclogenesis.html to http://nsidc.org/arcticmet/glossary/cyclogenesis.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090827030639/http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A15.html to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A15.html
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5gYGdo8A6?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aoml.noaa.gov%2Fhrd%2Ftcfaq%2FG1.html to http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/G1.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.met.gov.fj/2010_2011%20TC%20Guide.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.metsul.com/blog/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:05, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Tropical cyclogenesis. 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://web.archive.org/web/20071129132804/http://www.eng.warwick.ac.uk/staff/gpk/Teaching-undergrad/es441/GradientWind.pdf to http://www.eng.warwick.ac.uk/staff/gpk/Teaching-undergrad/es441/GradientWind.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060909224836/http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/publications/pdf/PPR-175.pdf to http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/publications/pdf/PPR-175.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060907034854/http://aurora.aos.wisc.edu/~edrappin/mesoconf.pdf to http://aurora.aos.wisc.edu/~edrappin/mesoconf.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060907032236/https://www.e-education.psu.edu/public/meteo/upperlevel_lows.html to https://www.e-education.psu.edu/public/meteo/upperlevel_lows.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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 02:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

January 12 2022 subtropical cyclone

Is this a subtropical cyclone or a tropical-like cyclone? 115.96.149.115 (talk) 10:12, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

The WPC classified the system as a subtropical cyclone within their bulletins for South America, however, others have been less sure. Regardless we can not and should not include it in the season article since the RSMC/TCWCs for the region monitor subtropical cyclones, but do not classify them as a part of the tropical cyclone season. They even changed the definition of what a tropical cyclone is to remove subtropical cyclones as a part of the TC Season.Jason Rees (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Guys i think south Atlantic storms are getting more common. What do you think?

Somebody have an explanation?177.22.1.138 (talk) 23:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

maybe global warming Bludzvi (talk) 15:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)