User talk:Chacor/Archive 03

'''I do not appreciate personal attacks. All personal attacks or trolling sections will be deleted/reverted without being read. Anonymous IP contributors, please see User talk:Chacor/AnonIPs. '''

Re:Template:Infobox hurricane user and WP:WHS nominated as candidates for speedy deletion
Yeah, there was some damage done. Now the template dont exist in my namespace, and therefor i have to recreate it again.  °≈§→  Robom  æ  yhem:   T / ←§≈° 21:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks  °≈§→  Robom  æ  yhem:   T / ←§≈° 02:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

User:CrazyC83/Florence06
Look, I'm not vandalizing anything or giving bad-faith edits. I'm rather wishing to help his prototype article so it could look better. --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody (talk + contribs + userboxes) 02:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, my bad. Couldn't know the difference between rv and rvv, but why is it not acceptable, I see no harm. --§ Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody (talk + contribs + userboxes) 03:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image
I had no idea that image was up somewhere else. Could you redirect me to it so I could replace the one in the article? -- § Hurricane E  RIC § archive 17:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Enjoy... Ione links
Here's some links in my favorites and from a quick google search that could be potentially useful for you.


 * Virginia Impact
 * NC Impact
 * More NC impact- From a book entitled North Carolina's Hurricane History
 * Preparations

Good luck with Ione. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Wow! That was a nice surprise! No, I don't mind at all if you want to add a co-nom. Thanks, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 03:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, matey. Your kind co-nom is very much appreciated. :) Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
for reverting the vandalism to my userpage! NawlinWiki 04:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Request for adminship
I saw your note that I have weak answers to the questions on my rfa. Do you know if I am allowed to expand on my answers or is it too late? Thanks for your help. --Anthony5429 07:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay - thanks again! --Anthony5429 07:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Timeline of the 2006 Pacific typhoon season
Hi again, I saw you added "September 13 9 p.m. UTC - Tropical Depression 15W forms south-southwest of Hong Kong." recently. Shouldn't this be September 12? Please change both the timeline article and in the main article if relevant. Thanks! - SpLoT 11:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Haha, no problem! It's sometimes confusing with +8 timezones. - SpLoT 12:46, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello!
Thank you very much, Chacor. :D RaNdOm26 13:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help
With Texas hurricanes. As i guess you noticed, i added several more storms. Carmen '74, TD6 '73, Anita '77, Chris '82 and Juan '85 were added. Think it is past the stub class?Mitchazenia 20:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
Chacor, thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks to the support of you and others, my RFA was a successful 95 to 1. It's great to see that such an established editor would confuse me for an admin, which means that I have all those qualities. Anyways, I will be sure to live up to that name! —     08:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Hurricane gordon 2006 cat3.jpg
I'm sorry, but I'm uncomfortable with speedying it under either I1 or I9. IFD seems to be the way to go. Conscious 09:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Images/Error cones
Just a feeling that the old name was actually incorrect since it isn't NONAME any more. Perhaps we should adopt a naming standard without the NONAME bit so it doesn't look odd when the system is upgraded... Does the new name cause a problem (apart from 1 more image to be deleted sometime)?--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 09:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:AIV
It would be helpful if you don't remove posts from your talkpage. Your an ex-admin? Which one? Sugar pine t 14:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am. I was wondering when someone would notice that....You were NSLE wern't you? And you had a love for Wikipedia so you couldn't just leave forever? Sugar pine t 14:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comments on Thatcher131's RfA
Chacor, I'd encourage you to revist the RfA due to additional information regarding the incident surrounding Thatcher131's comment being posted. The comment is fairly out of context, and misses a great deal of the underlying history in the dispute. Thatcher131 was acting in accordance with an ArbCom decision. In fact, User:SPUI has been banned three times due to violation of his probation from the related RfAr. I'm not asking you to change your vote. I am asking you to reconsider your position in light of additional evidence and to do what you think is right, given that new information. All the best, --Durin 04:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Aww, my bad :(
Sorry about that, but actually, I had been working on the Lane all day today in bits and pieces. I checked Wikipedia very little today, and I completely missed your message. Heh, I didn't think anyone would have made the article so soon, anyway. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 03:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Again, I'm sorry about that. Feel free to add any info from the subpage into it. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 03:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: IRC
I'll try another computer and another name. I have no idea what's wrong, but something doesn't like me. :/ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Could you possibly help me out? My problem before was that I was kept being disconnected. Now, I got connected, but when I entered #wiki-hurricanes, I can only read messages I am writing. Do you have any idea what the problem might be? Sorry, but I know very, very little about IRC. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Mind taking a screenshot? – Chacor 16:07, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Here. It keeps saying to reconnect, but /reconnect doesn't work.


 * I just got your message. Thanks. I downloaded Chatzilla, so hopefully that'll work. Stupid question, now that I downloaded it, how do I get it to work? Sorry for bugging, but I'm pretty bad with computers. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your help! Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Please don't smite me
I added Miriam to your list. -24.92.41.95 22:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

But
But the template said total storms. There were 31 total storms. But, there were only 28 named storms. Tcatron565 12:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Just some questions
1) Why did you threaten, on my talk page, to have me banned when you are not an administrator? 2) What "legitimate warning" was placed on my page which motivated you to edit my page? 3) Out of the untold hundreds-of-thousands of user talk pages on Wikipedia, why did you single my page out, and how were you made aware of my page and its edits just minutes after I edited the comments placed by another user?J.R. Hercules 15:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Image for deletion
I have tagged for deletion the 'forecast' tracks for some finished tropical storms. This includes Image:TD62006atlantic.gif which I see you have linked on User:Chacor/Sandbox/IHCtest - will this cause you problems?--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 15:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

User talk:4.249.0.240 and Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
I just want to make you aware of a continued issue with this user in circumventing the Good article process in randomly adding the GA tag to this article. I've encouraged him to follow the proper procedures in having it reviewed according to GA and reminded him of the 3RR since you have reverted him once before. Hopefully this user will not escalate matters but, again, I just wanted to make you aware. Agne 16:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, be careful regarding closing AfDs. WP:SNOW isn't really a valid reason, especially when other speedy keep criteria apply.  Thanks! --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Pfffff. Sure it is. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry!
Sorry about this! I knew I had seen Hurricane Lane there, and I didn't know it had dissipated. The last time I had checked to NHC was earlier today when it was still a tropical depression. -- Nish kid 64 19:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

your RfA
Hi - I appreciate your feelings and point of view. I'll give you the same advice I was given during my failed RfA - don't respond to every oppose vote. Its obvious to me that the pain of the last 4 months is still bottled up. Let it out, get positive and be patient. I would have been only too happy to support your nom, except for this clear problem with attitude. Rama's arrow 14:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * That's exactly what I thought I was doing in my RfA. I know its enraging, but people WILL take your replies the wrong way. This is exactly what pissed me off during my RfA. Rama's arrow  14:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you agree that User:BobbyLee should be SNOW'ed from WP:RFA?`
I noticed that you commented negatively on his RFA (no need for tools). User:Naconkantari removed him from WP:RFA without explanation, although I assume the rationale is WP:SNOW. I am in the midst of writing up an explanation for BobbyLee's benefit and saw your comment on the RFA discussion page. I would think that with 180 edits and 33% usage of edit summaries, this guy has far less than a snowball's chance in hell of getting approved.

Do you agree?

--Richard 06:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, so you, me and User:Naconkantari all agree that he would eventually get SNOWed. Do you agree that we should be SNOWing him this early in the process?  Are we jumping the gun or should we just get this over with so as to save him the embarassment and not waste other people's time with this one?


 * I wouldn't have taken the initiative to SNOW him this early but User:Naconkantari did and I'm just following his lead.


 * I want to be on really solid ground since User:BobbyLee is questioning why we are doing this to him. From a naive perspective, this is very early in the process to be SNOWing him because he hasn't seen ANY negative votes yet so he has had no chance to appreciate the avalanche of negative votes that is awaiting him.  We could wait until 10 negative votes were cast and then SNOW him but I figure, why waste the time of 10 people?  Since you commented on the RFA, I figure you're a good person to consult.  Thanx.


 * --Richard 06:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Hey NSLE, I know you're busy with your own RfA, but I just wanted to thankyou for your co-nomination. It was really nice to have someone from my very early days on the project willing to put my name forward. I must say that I'm really glad the whole thing is over! :) Cheers mate, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 08:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

RfA
My posting an optional question edit-conflicted with your withdrawing, but I should like to ask in any event; you are, to be sure, under no obligation to reply, and I will surely understand if you should be disinclined to answer, but I'd be quite grateful were to answer, if only because your clearing up the issue would assuage some of my concerns and make me likelier than not to support the next RfA. So,
 * Am I nuts (a reasonable possibility) or did you, à la Jtkiefer, support with one account and oppose with another twice at RfA (in Requests for adminship/Jaranda 2 [here] and [here] and in Requests for adminship/Badlydrawnjeff [here] and [here])? If so, I wonder if you might offer an explanation, both as to whether the double-voting (voting is evil and RfA is not a vote, etc.) reflected simple ambivalence on your part vis-à-vis the respective candidates and as to whether the double-voting was in contravention of WP:SOCK (I imagine that you partook of each RfA with Chacor in order that you might begin to build a history for that account, which I supppose wouldn't be particularly bad; others, though, may think such usage to be, well, bad). TIA, Joe 16:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * There's no need to expand your answer, which I find to be altogether fine. I well understand why you participated in the RfAs under both names, and I really don't think you did anything wrong; at the very least, you neither disrupted the project generally nor affected the determination of a consensus specifically.  If you should like to expand your response (for example, so that you might reference it in a subsequent RfA), you may, of course, do so, but my concerns are indeed allayed.  Many thanks for your having replied so quickly. :) Joe 18:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA
Hi Chacor, I just noticed you posted an answer to my question on your RfA, and also that you have withdrawn your nomination. So instead of commenting on the closed page, I dropped by here to say thanks for the clarification, I just felt the IRC situation with one ArbCom member was a bit ambiguous, but your explanation cleared that up nicely. I think you did the right thing in withdrawing, and I would encourage you to wait until well into next year before reapplying if you intend to do so in the future. Best wishes. -- Cactus.man  &#9997;  18:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 05:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

My apologies
Regarding moving the Gordon Hurricane page. I forgot about the edit history concerns. My mistake. Iorek85 06:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

 * Hmmm, RSMC WPTC has analysed this system and decided it is non-tropical at this time...--Nilfanion (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Happy first edit day! -- Selmo (talk) 23:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: 1994
If you have a list of Pagasa names for that year, feel free to use it. I had trouble finding one, so I used the 1998's list, and replaced whatever name was retired in 1994 with what it's original name was. I had a feeling something was going to be wrong... Just to make sure, do you have the Dartmough flood observatory link? It has good info on WPAC storms that the JTWC might have missed. I'd imagine that impact in that time period would be a little hard to find. Well, good luck with the article. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Very cool. Good luck and have fun :) Hurricanehink ( talk ) 15:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Richard Hammond
Hi there.

Re: Hammonds crash is not of international interest. Please note that it is a major story in the UK and even made page 2 of many newpapers here in Australia. Top Gear is watched by over 200 million people so therefore, it is an international interest.

(Borisjohns 12:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Sorry, disagree mate. It is a worldwide interest. Hammond is a popular tv personality and many people would like to know how his progress is going.

(Borisjohns 12:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Mate, this is a famous tv presenter who was seriously injured whilst filming for the worlds premier motoring show. WP:NOT does not say that this cant be added to the current events.

(Borisjohns 12:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Im not even going to bother arguing with you mate. Richard Hammond's crash is a major current event news story. Im sure there are many more people out there who would agree with what I want to put on here. As usual the minority spoil it for the rest. Thank you.

(Borisjohns 13:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

No article?? what on wikipedia or on the web??

(Borisjohns 13:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC))


 * While the progress of a car accident victim is not inherently newsworthy, the wide distribution of Top Gear worldwide (est. audience 350 million, apparently) makes it likely that there is considerable interest in Richard Hammond's condition. It has certainly been the lead or second item in all TV and radio news bulletins in the UK for the last two days. -- Arwel (talk) 13:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Mate, It wont be a day-by-day progress report. It's just that its a current event story thats got two parts over two days. (Borisjohns 13:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Category parents (Specifically hurricanes)
The rules I am operating under come from here, guideline #3. This states that, in general, an article should not be in both a category and a parent/grandparent/etc of that category. For the hurricanes, in general the articles are in the " hurricane season" category, which is in the " meteorology" category and the " hurricane seasons" category. Finally the " hurricane seasons" cateogry is in the " hurricanes" category. So, by being in the " hurricane season" category, the articles themselves have " meteorology" and " hurricanes" already as parent and grand parent categories to a category that they are in. And IMHO they really do not fit the exceptions mentioned in the guideline. So, if they are going to be categorized by " hurricane season", the others are thus already implied, and the are redundant clutter. So the articles should be in the most specific category possible, and removed from the less-specific, more general categories. This allows for neat, systematic categorization of articles, and reduces/eliminates clutter of the more general categories.

As for getting the entire set of hurricanes cleaned up, I have no problem in doing it. It will not happen overnight though. I'm no bot. But I'm willing to clean them up bit-by-bit, and they will get done. I'll hold off for the moment. I did 2003 - 2005 yesterday, working out of the meterorology by year categories. If it needs to be undone, I can easily hit the rollback button on myself on most of them (around 2 dozen so far). But I truely feel that these extra categories are unneeded, duplicative clutter, and should be removed. - TexasAndroid 13:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Holding off. - TexasAndroid 13:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Bend "when it makes sense".  In this case, it doesn't make sense to me.  You end up with at least one category with over 400 articles in it, when all those articles are already neatly sub-categorized.  That's unneeded clutter, IMHO.  Another point I've not made yet is that the current scheme is placing many storms that topped out at tropical storm strength into a "Hurricane" category.  Huh?  If they did not ever become hurricanes, what sense does it make to categorize them as hurricanes.  OTOH, they do still fall quite nicely into the "Hurricane Seasons" categories, as the seasons encompass all storms of all sizes for that year.  Still holding off.  But I've yet to see any logical reason that these articles need to be left in the "Hurricane" category when they are already in the "season" subcats.
 * On a slightly different note, you have not directly protested my removal of the meteorology year categories from the same articles. This was being done under the same parent/grandparent logic.  Is this change more acceptable to you?  I'm holding off on it as well, even if you have no objection, as I would prefer to make both changes at the same time, rather than double the work by doing one change now, and coming back to do the other change later. - TexasAndroid 14:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The Halo's RfA


Tropical cyclones
Good job with the merge. Keep up the good work! --Alan Au 01:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Your last edit was fair
Sadly I don't know how to put it in the US area. grazon 02:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

In error
I do apologise if I'm in error. At this time, I expect to see a tornado myself, if I don't get killed by it. the cause of this outbreak is that a STRONG cold front is barging through my area, and it has a history of producing supercell storms, hail and electrical storms, and tornadoes. Again, I do apologise for being in error. Martial Law 02:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Kokota
Fair enough. I didn't spot the indef block, as I was just checking user to see if I should remove the sock accusation. Looking at the larger edit pattern, he seems to have resurrected vandal edits from a wide variety of sources, so while he isn't a sock he certainly is disruptive. With the borderline suspected socks, I just tend to patrol them periodically to see if I've made a mistake, and in this case I did. I want the sock categories to be as clear to admins as possible.--Rosicrucian 14:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

review
Hi Chacor - I request you to take some time to give me the benefit of your criticism and advice on Editor review/Rama's Arrow 2. It will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Rama's arrow  13:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Bolding in RfA
Sorry, Chacor, that was me - no harm intended. I was just updating tally and format, got in an edit conflict, someone else updated tally, and I thought I was doing a good thing. I won't do that again :-) Best, Sandy 02:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

ACE figures
Sorry to split hairs, but (not wanting to start a revert war!) I make the total 71.0675 which would normally round to 71.1, not 71.0. I've checked each storm with the Source tables. What do you make it?--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 15:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

RFA
Just to explain the reason for that addition, which you reverted - there have been about 5 newbie RFAs in as many days recently that just didn't have a hope in hell. People are clearly not reading the guidelines and I thought that adding a little more forceful wording would help. Pile-on opposes are dispiriting enough, but when we have RFAs where editors are voting neutral to avoid a pile-on oppose that it becomes clear that things are going wrong. That's even more dispiriting. Something needs to be done to ensure that editors actually read WP:GRFA, but apologies if my edit was not politic enough. I still think, however, that a similar comment needs to go in. Best, Moreschi 18:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Re:ForestH2
Really? I don't even know what I did wrong. If you're talking about the Cowcam thing, I swear on my life he isn't ForestH2. I know Cowcam personally, but definetly not ForestH2. íslenskur fellibylur #12 (samtal) 22:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Gary Padgett also uses JMA
Okay, to clarify things up, Gary Padgett does use JMA data as well. Read "Sources of Information" in "NORTHWEST PACIFIC (NWP) - North Pacific Ocean West of Longitude 180" here -. Just to let you know. RaNdOm26 11:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted material
Just to let you know, a while back, you closed an AfD Articles for deletion/True v. USAA as delete. That material seems to have been recreated under the name True v United Services Automobile Association. I've nommed it for AfD again, but since it's recreation, would it be more appropriate to speedy? Thanks! Akradecki 23:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! (Although, I did give him a gentle nudge...he forgot the four tildas on his close message). Akradecki 01:08, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/NCurse
Hi. Did you mean to vote "support" at Requests for adminship/NCurse? Your entry is under the discussion section, not the support section. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Zeta
Thanks for your reply about the Zeta issue. As a newbie to this area of Wikipedia, I wasn't aware that it had already been discussed to death. --Portnadler 13:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #5
The October issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I Will Be Careful
Thanks for guiding me Chacor ! --Ashokmpatel 12:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Minimum Pressure for Cyclones
Very Severe Tropical Cyclone Mala had maximum wind speeds of 125 Knots and corresponding minimum pressure of 954 mbars as has been mentioned relying on RSMC values. However, looking at the wind speeds of 125 Knots, the minimum pressure should surely be less than what RSMC has mentioned. The data at http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/atcf_web/doc_archives/bio022006.dat shows that the minimum pressure was 916 mbars when winds were at 125 Knots. --Ashokmpatel 17:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Recent redirecting
Hi, can you not do potentially contraversial redirects like with List of records broken by the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season and Typhoons in the Philippines, it smacks of WP:OWN if you don't discuss things on-wiki first. In the case of the first, I agree it should be gone, but AFD is the venue to deal with it - a redirect there is pointless. In the case of the second a cross-space redirect without discussion is inappropriate. I'm aware that discussion on IRC may well have preceded these actions, but to just act on IRC discussion without reporting somewhere on-wiki isn't good. There's two reasons there: first it gives transparency, its not clear why the actions are occuring without some message on-wiki and second with potentially contraversial edits like these, they really should be discussed beforehand by a larger group (not just the consensus of whoever is on IRC at the time). Thanks.--Nilfanion (talk) 15:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not accussing you of OWN here, I'm stating that doing things on the basis of consensus of "whoever is on IRC at the time" gives that appearance. At the very least, discuss these things on here first; we both know there are several editors who may well have valuable opinions to express who are not on the channel. In the case of the first, that would have included me and I would have spoken against it for the same reason as I did when I showed up. Can you respond to my comments on the Philippine TY talk?--Nilfanion (talk) 15:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh and I discussed the records list with coredesat yesterday, so I understand what happened with that one.--Nilfanion (talk) 15:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)