User talk:Andreiii3213

Hi:

Please don't replace an TS image that is evolutive (Chantal Geostationary VIS-IR 2019.jpg) by a snapshot at a certain date before the storm end.

Pierre cb (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Recovered people in Poland.
Hey, I saw that you have changed the total recovered patients in Poland to 32, but you only changed that on the main page (also sources needed there), so to be accurate you also need to change that number in and add sources to every case and the day they got recovered and also in the other temples as well. Natanieluz (talk) 10:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, i did ask if that correct and linked the unofficial site with sources to recoveries https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IkXPT1r1R81tm4nLS7J4u-2rAIgi4QzPvVubJc-Jk2c/edit#gid=0 Andreiii3213 (talk) 12:40, 30 march 2020 (UTC+1)
 * yes, of course you provided that link, but I was saying about the other temples because you only corrected the total number on the main page, but you didn't include them on "SARS-CoV-2 timeline in Poland", you see? there is 0 new recovered on 30 March and total of 28- because you didn't add there that updated numbers and source :), Natanieluz (talk) 14:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

ACE
Hi Andreiii3213, I would like to take the time to respond to your recent edits which added information to the ACE article which is no longer valid and is original research. Firstly we have to remember that it is just a single metric that is used worldwide and not just inside the Atlantic and Eastern Pacific basins to assess tropical cyclone seasons. This includes by the official warning centres of the North Indian and Australian basins, which would mean that there was no excuse for their data not to be added in. In the long run as more and more agencies start to use ACE, this article would have become even more of a mess/dumping ground by having 14+ tables, listing all of the totals from each of the 7 basins and would have probably breached Wikipedia's rules in several different ways as well as being a very large list.

We also have to note that the way we calculate ACE is disputed. Dr Gray who originally invented the scale only used hurricanes to calculate the Hurricane Destruction Potential, while NOAA tweaked and renamed it to include all tropical and subtropical storms. These days noted experts in ACE don't add in subtropical storms, while the IMD calculates it for all cyclonic disturbances above 17 kts. As a result, I wonder why we should even be including examples of ACE yet alone a full list for each basin rather than cleaning the page up to meet Wikipedia's standards. We have moved the data on the page to Atlantic hurricane season and Pacific hurricane season where the appropiate weight can be given to the article. Jason Rees (talk) 21:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * the only thing what i dont like about the new style of page that its less readable to me and i have that in head to check ACE i would have to go to ACE page not certain basins, so i was confused where the stuff is, i guess we cant have readable lists for now due to Wikipedia TOS so i guess for now i have to stick with the new way of checking the ACE Andreiii3213 (talk) 13:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC+2 or Polish summer time)