Talk:Typhoon Meranti

Climate change

Now editors undid my revision on climate change. I will not undue anymore. However, we can infer that the intensity of Typhoon Haiyan, Typhoon Meranti, and Typhoon Lionrock, is due to climate change and we know there has been extensive media coverage on all those storms. There may not have been coverage in the United States, but there is in Asia, and that certainly counts. If they choose not to even mention climate change in this article, then they are ignoring it. Excedron9238 (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

"We can infer" - this part, with regards to this particular storm, is just pure WP:SYNTH. It is also generally not appropriate to attribute such a small data set to a longer term climate change.

As added, what you wrote also was just false in general. This storm is in fact rather short-lived compared to many of last year's storms, and the maintenance of Category 4 or 5 intensity is due to its traveling over warm waters, lack of wind shear, and (perhaps most to the point), the fact that an eyewall replacement cycle did not come until rather late in its lifetime. Rainfall from a tropical cyclone is also generally not a function of storm intensity or duration, but rather, of size and speed of movement, neither of which were that abnormal with this storm.

What sources have been saying is that we may be seeing an uptick in intense storms in general. They are not saying this exact storm is attributable to climate change (which is unscientific to say even if you couple it with a small number of other storms), nor are they saying anything about its duration. While intense, this storm was not abnormal by western Pacific standards.

@Cyclonebiskit: do you have anything to say?--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:23, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

@Excedron9238: Anyway, if you still want to create a section relating Typhoon Meranti to climate change, I would advise you to refer to Typhoon Haiyan#Climate change, and cite peer-reviewed scientific research to support such a connection. ~ KN2731 {talk} 11:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 26 February 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved per general consensus and in accordance with WP:WPTC article title policy. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 11:14, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

---

Typhoon Meranti (2016) → Typhoon Meranti – Name has been retired. ~ KN2731 {talk} 11:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

This probably falls under WP:NOTRM, so I don't see a point in this RM. Support for obvious reasons. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 00:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Agree, requesting speedy move. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 01:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Just for more info, they have just announced about an hour ago so we're fine. :) Typhoon2013 (talk) 03:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

• It's confirmed now, @MarioProtIV and Typhoon2013: you are free to move. --219.78.191.24 (talk) 05:20, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Wait for the RM to be closed properly before moving. I don't wanna sound mean, but since there's been a bit of a wheel war, reminding everyone here. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 05:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
• Is a formal closure of the RM really necessary, when clear consensus is (now) there? Wheel-warring has stopped. Just saying....Lectonar (talk) 10:34, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.