User talk:CycloneTheta
Add topicCyclone Maila's visual aid path
[edit]Discuss Cyclone Maila's visual aid path below. This area is intended to be related to making changes to the image itself, discuss it's addition to the article here. CycloneTheta (talk) 08:13, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 27
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1876 Bowen tornado, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bowen was added.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:04, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 4
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1876 Bowen tornado, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bowen was added.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:30, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 24
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Typhoon Wanda (1956), a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depression was added.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 21:49, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 13
[edit]An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1965 Pacific typhoon season, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Category 5 was added.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2026 (UTC)
Hey there CT, first off, thanks for working on that season article! Second off, I don't think you need the table comparing the various agencies' peak intensity. The table looks a bit awkward, and that info should be in prose instead. Also, you added "Despite its short duration and landfall, damages to any region is unknown.". But that isn't too useful. It would be better to avoid adding that, so other users might be curious in the future to add the information (if there is any). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:58, 14 July 2026 (UTC)
Nomination of 1876 Bowen tornado for deletion
[edit]
The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1876 Bowen tornado until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed.