Talk:List of Category 5 South Pacific severe tropical cyclones

Other Systems
I would be curious to know why you feel that we shouldnt include Daman/Judy on this list when they were forecast to become Category 5 severe tropical cyclones. My belief is that Category 5 is rarely forecast and that they should be included so that we can show that we are being comprehensive with the list.Jason Rees (talk) 08:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Forecasts get things wrong all the time. If Daman or Judy had their forecasts peak at just below category 5, I highly doubt they would be on List of Category 4 South Pacific severe tropical cyclones (there are no mentions of forecasts on that page). There is nothing special about a forecast getting something wrong. In my opinion, other systems (for these articles) should only include systems that have some evidence for category 5 status by an official agency.
 * (sorry for late reply, I was sick all of Wednesday) RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 17:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I will respond to your comments tommorrow, but the main thing is that you came back to me.Jason Rees (talk) 21:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Your comments require a bit of unpacking, which is why I decided against responding until now. Firstly I agree that there is nothing special about getting a forecast wrong, however, as I said Category 5 is rarely forecast and there always seems to be a lot of media coverage associated with a Cat 5 forecast. More than a Cat 3 TC being forecast to be a Cat 4, which is what I presume you meant as Daman/Judy are listed in the appropriate places on List of Category 4 South Pacific severe tropical cyclones. As for the other systems this article covers, we have to remember that the SPAC basin is not as well defined as we may like, since the JTWC states that it starts at 135E, while I have seen Cape York, 140E and 180 used as dividers before now. As a result, I personally believe that we have no choice but to acknowledge Aivu, Harry, Rewa, Theodore, Yasi and Niran since they were Cat 5's in the South Pacific Ocean per BoM. Pam 74 is included since the BoM had it as a Cat 5 but downgraded it to a Cat 4 while in the basin, while Anne would have been considered to be a Cat 5 TC on the SSHWS (which is the official scale for AS). I have personally wondered if we shouldn't add Nisha-Orama and Veena to the official list of Cat 5's, as they have been reanalysed by MFR/MFFP as having 10-min sustained wind speeds equivalent to a Cat 5 STC, however, I decided against it, as there is no evidence that the FMS considers them to be a Cat 5. It is also good to include reliable journal articles that have studied extreme tropical cyclones in the region as it shows outsiders that it is a notable topic. I am pleased by your feedback though as it is hard to get feedback on these lists.Jason Rees (talk) 21:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm making a discussion on the WikiProject talk page (here) to get more participants in on the discussion. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 22:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Over the last few days, I have been thinking more and more about including forecasted TC's ad decided that I was putting too much weight on them being forecasted to be Cat 5's.00:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Jason Rees (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)