Talk:Tropical cyclones by year

Split by decade

@Hurricanehink: Ummmmm...can we split this by decade or something? Trying to edit this is going to be a nightmare.ChessEric (talk) 00:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

The whole point is that the entire table can be sorted, whether by deaths, total storms, total damage. Editing it is like other articles. Ctrl + F whatever year you're going for, go to the basin, badabing, badaboom. (or no?) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Why don't we have "hidden headings", like the one in WP:UP#NOTSUITED, so it would be like 1895 [edit source] FOO 1896 [edit source] FOO 1897 [edit source] but it wouldn't show up in the contents. @ChessEric:, I totally agree with you. 🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 10:31, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Chicdat:I have no idea what that means (I'm still somewhat new here), but if it will make it easier, I'm all for it. @Hurricanehink:I didn't know that either. LOL!ChessEric (talk) 13:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

That is why I think there is a benefit to having everything in the same table, even if it is ginormous. Users should be able to sort by the deadliest years/seasons, which would point to a lot of North Indian Ocean seasons. The costliest seasons are either Atlantic or WPAC. I'm all for improving the article/table, and open for suggestions, especially if the consensus is that it's better splitting it up. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

...Yea, looking at this again with some perspective with time, I apologize, we should split this by century IMO. I think decade is a little too often, since it goes back to the 10th century. The first one should be pre-15th century. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Sources

I am going to spend the next couple of months adding sources to this article. I will have to split it into 20-year segments to make it doable. Noah^Talk 19:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks @Hurricane Noah: adding the sources will add even more to the credibility of this article, and will help it one day become a featured list. Possibly the most important list in the project. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink: Keep in mind I will have to add another column in to host all the refs. We may be fine, but size could be an issue when it comes to this page. If there are ONLY 5 sources (will be more than this) per basin per year (7 basins), that adds up to 35. In the 20 year period I selected to start with, that would mean 700 sources. If each source is around 300 bytes... Im sure you see where I am going with that. I will keep going as long as I can, but if we approach 2000k, the page will have to split. Noah^Talk 19:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Some things can be sourced in bulk, like the number of storms in the Atlantic in a given year ([1]). Some users above mentioned the desire to split up this page, so I won't oppose if there's a consensus for that. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink:Yeah, I'm well aware of the sourcing by bulk for storms... the issue comes from damages and deaths for which each storm generally needs its own sources. I'm actually going to have to split my smaller portion into decade lengths to avoid hitting the limit when I go to archive links. I'm just stating there is a high possibility of us hitting the technical limit for article size when we add in the thousands of sources needed to substantiate all this info. Noah^Talk 19:59, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, a split by decade seems the best option for keeping the articles under the technical limit for templates and page size. WP frowns upon articles around 500k for whatever reason. Should we change the page structure any? I will begin sourcing 2010–2019 tomorrow evening. Noah^Talk 23:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

If anyone wants to tackle the beast that is splitting up this article, by all means go ahead. I'm just rather busy these days between work and moving, so I won't be able to get around to it anytime soon. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Here's a thought. What if, when the article gets too big, parts are transcluded, rather than being split up? I believe there is value in having a single page documenting the number of storms by every year. I believe transclusion would allow for the a table and references to show up, but it wouldn't cause the article to be too large. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:09, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

• 2000–2009
• 2010–2019

"Tropical cyclones in xxxx" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Tropical cyclones in xxxx. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 18#Tropical cyclones in xxxx until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Update!

Please update it. Daniel boxs (talk) 05:23, 22 March 2022 (UTC)