User talk:Runningonbrains/Archive 6

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Tornadoes in Hawaii
Category:Tornadoes in Hawaii, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a  message on my talk page. 06:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Weather up for FRC
Weather has been nominated for a featured portal review. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 18:11, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Aloha
Just though I would let you know I just about giggled with excitement when I saw you were getting involved in the Mid-April 2011 tornado outbreak article. I hope life has been treating you well; I haven't seen you around the wiki hardly at all. At any rate, it would help us greatly if you could help out with that article. The more experienced severe weather editors we have on board the better. =) Ks0stm  If you reply here, please leave me a  message on my talk page. 05:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Images
With regards to freely licensed images in the tornado outbreak article, I even checked Flickr for ones of the Tuscaloosa tornado but came up empty. I added the template to the talk page, but I doubt that will produce results. It seems the only routes here for images might be permissions requests and or fair-use rationales. Any other suggestions? Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a  message on my talk page. 16:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Second question
You might take a look at my question here; I forgot you were an admin. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a  message on my talk page. 17:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, it seems HJ Mitchell got back to me...but feel free to weigh in if you want. Ks0stm  If you reply here, please leave me a  message on my talk page. 18:03, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Tornados
I did not ignore the note. 350 is currently the most accepted number by up-to-date sources. Marcus  Qwertyus   21:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem
Thanks for the tip about putting in an edit summary. I too have been removing premature EF5 ratings to the Tuscaloosa tornado 8^) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mongoose470 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Regarding "Super Outbreak" as an adjective
I agree that such an adjective should be officially defined before using such terminology to describe an event. I accept the undo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mongoose470 (talk • contribs) 03:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: April 25-28 2011 Tornado Outbreak wording
Good evening! What I meant to do with my edit was to clean up that particular section so that it would be clear that the Tupelo-Gainesville outbreak was actually the second-deadliest in U.S. history, according to the known death tolls. I didn't make it clear enough the first time around but I tried again. (CapeFearWX (talk) 03:14, 1 May 2011 (UTC))

Made a win script
Enjoy the Windows script for counting tornadoes. It's trivial to make it point to another table when the time comes. -- ke4roh (talk) 23:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Springfield Debris
It's stated in the SPC storm reports "A LETTER FROM SPRINGFIELD CAUGHT IN UPDRAFTS WAS FOUND IN MILLBURY AT 820 PM" Cyclonebiskit (talk)

Re: yeah, that news article is full of shit; it's pretty much accepted that it was a single tornado.
That is your personal opinion. How about a citation? You offer no citation other than Grazulis. What page number? How about a sample piece of text that supports your claim? How can anyone verify that? I am reverting your revert. Think wisely before starting a revert war. "that news article is full of shit; it's pretty much accepted that it was a single tornado." Back that opinion up. How do I know you are not "full of shit?" I added an additional citation. TimL (talk) 06:04, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Weather
Thanks for continuing to update the portal. I have commented on finding more red links and about the portal's "on this day" stories slightly too US-centric. Please take a look and comment on it. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

(Expanding) Blue Circle Phenomenon appearance on NEXRAD weather maps.
To date there are no explanations of this repetitious phenomenon.

This is at least a valid stab at explaining the incidental appearance of expanding blue circles appearing at a distance from radar sites. The comparative analysis to explosive shockwaves may be removed if it will prevent misunderstandings.

I could express the system in greater systematic detail if you wish.

Regards, John Jthuebner (talk) 13:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

(Expanding) Blue Circle Phenomenon appearance on NEXRAD weather maps...Continued
I agree with the page change to the Radar page and unfortunately, this is original work - my apologies. I'd like to know your thoughts on the phenomenon which I can possibly provide a screen captured image. I believe that the process occurs in relatively calm but saturated air where the heat of vaporization reaches a super critical level forcing the moisture to diffuse outward from the source and those radars that are in Clear Air Mode can pick up on the wave of outflowing moisture.

Great to hear from you so soon,

John

Blue Circles Cont.
The image you provided is not the correct image I'm referring to. I'll get back to you after next week - Going to Hilton Head for a week. When I get back I'll try to obtain a sequence of images. It shouldn't take long as these expanding circles are quite common. Have a great week. John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jthuebner (talk • contribs) 16:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Just letting you know that I responded to your request. Tim 1357  talk  03:16, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Weather records
I'm sorry. I won't be rude anymore. Scheridon (talk) 01:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Shuttle promotion
Doesn't look like you filled out the template for the promotion. Says filename.jpg

FPC closure
Hi RoB! Thanks for closing Featured picture candidates/STS-134 launch, we do need the help. A couple minor squabbles: Hope this helps! Thanks for taking an interest in FPC closures, and I hope to see you around again. Cheers,  Jujutacular  talk 00:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Make sure you keep the comment "End of FPs" at Template:Announcements/New featured content, your edit removed it. I have added it back. The comment is used by my FPC-closing script. See below.
 * Make sure to increment the FP count at Featured pictures when promoting, I have done so for your promotion.
 * Instead of doing all that work manually, you can use a script I wrote: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC. There are only a few things you still have to do manually, mainly adding the image to the proper sub-page of WP:FP. If you have any trouble with it, or you are not sure exactly how to install/use it, let me know.

May 21-27, 2011 outbreak sequence
Rather than getting into a messy revert, I'll discuss here. The two tornadoes listed at the end are merely a continuation of the previous event rather than a separate outbreak. The front stalled out near the East Coast, creating continued severe weather events, including those two tornadoes. Since it's synoptically the same system, there's no real reason to exclude them. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:20, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, no argument here now. Thanks for the clarification. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Radar Blue Circles Continued
I'm back from Hilton Head. Sorry for the delay on this subject. I have already captured an image from http://radar.weather.gov/ridge/Conus/full_loop.php that shows the expanding circles (always in the morning and at a distance from the radar sites). I can provide the screen captured images but I’m not sure how to attach the images in this forum. Thanks, John


 * I’ve read a little about you and it seems that we have much in common. I majored in physics and also have an interest in meteorology (and space weather).  I once considered majoring in meteorology.  It is because of our common interests that I prefer to work with you on this phenomenon - If you are okay with that. 216.49.114.77 (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If this is what you call a forum, them this is how you include an image. &mdash; RHaworth 17:45, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with the over-tagging.
Hi Runningonbrains, thanks for helping with the over-tagging on the article, Ahmed Abdel Azeem.


 * Recall: 04:31, 19 July 2011 Runningonbrains(talk | contribs) (6,874 bytes) (Holy over-tagging Batman!)

I have been quite active trying to rescue the article and did not feel it would be appropriate for me to remove the tags which had become irrelevant. So, thanks for taking it in hand. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 21:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Annular Typhoons
I found information on the article on Typhoon Rusa that mentions annular structure in the storm's meteorological history section. I don't know if that is enough to make a annular typhoon section but just a thought. Stormchaser89 (talk) 9:45, 22 July 2011 (US Central)

Nahum Gergel
Hello, Runningonbrains,

I've just finished adding references to the article about Nahum Gergel and wondering is this enough or I shall look further?

Also, I've started to work on the Russian translation of the article - as soon as translation is finished I'd like to contribute it and to link it to the original English article. Is there an easy way of doing it (providing there is an already existing article in English)?

Your help is greatly appreciated!

VRaykin. VRaykin (talk) 02:36, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

News and progress from RfA reform 2011
(You are receiving this message because you are either a task force member, or you have contributed to recent discussions on any of these pages.)

The number of nominations continues to nosedive seriously, according to  these monthly figures. We know why this is, and if the trend continues our reserve of active admins will soon be underwater. Wikipedia now needs suitable editors to come forward. This can only be achieved either through changes to the current system, a radical alternative, or by fiat from elsewhere.

A lot of work is constantly being done behind the scenes by the coordinators and task force members, such as monitoring the talk pages, discussing new ideas, organising  the project  pages, researching  statistics and keeping  them  up  to  date. You'll also see for example that  we have recently  made tables to  compare how other Wikipedias choose  their sysops, and some tools have been developed to more closely examine !voters' habits.

The purpose of WP:RFA2011 is to focus attention on  specific issues of our  admin  selection  process and to develop  RfC proposals for solutions to improve them. For this, we have organised the project into dedicated sections each with their own discussion pages. It is important to understand that  all Wikipedia policy changes take a long  time to implement whether or not the discussions appear to  be active - getting the proposals right before offering them for discussion by the broader community is crucial to the success of any RfC. Consider keeping the pages and their talk pages on your watchlist; do check out older threads before starting a new one on topics that have been discussed already, and if you start a new thread, please revisit it regularly to follow up on new comments.

The object of WP:RFA2011 is not  to make it  either  easier or harder to  become an admin -  those criteria are set by  those who  !vote at  each  RfA. By providing  a unique venue for developing ideas for  change independent  of  the general discussion  at  WT:RFA, the project has two  clearly  defined goals: The fastest way is through improvement to the current system. Workspace is however also available within the project  pages to  suggest  and discuss ideas that are not  strictly  within  the remit  of this project. Users are invited to make use of these pages where they  will  offer maximum exposure to  the broader community, rather than individual  projects in  user space.
 * 1) Improving the environment  that  surrounds RfA in  order to  encourage mature, experienced editors of the right  calibre to  come forward, pass the interview, and dedicate some of their  time to  admin  tasks.
 * 2) Discouraging, in the nicest  way  possible of course, those whose RfA will be obvious NOTNOW or SNOW, and to  guide them towards the advice pages.

We already know what's wrong with RfA - let's not clutter the project with perennial chat. RFA2011 is now ready to propose some of the elements of reform, and all the task force needs to do now is to pre-draft those proposals in the project's workspace, agree on the wording, and then offer them for central discussion where the entire Wikipedia community will be more than welcome to express their opinions in  order to  build consensus.

New tool Check your RfA !voting history! Since the editors' RfA !vote counter at X!-Tools has been down for a long while, we now have a new RfA Vote Counter to replace it. A significant improvement on the former tool, it provides a a complete breakdown of an editor's RfA votes, together with an analysis of the participant's voting pattern.

Are you ready to help? Although the main engine of RFA2011 is its task force, constructive comments from any  editors are always welcome on  the project's various talk  pages. The main reasons  why  WT:RfA was never successful in  getting  anything  done are that threads on different aspects of RfA are all mixed together, and are then archived where nobody  remembers them and where they  are hard to  find - the same is true of ad hoc threads on  the founder's talk  page.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 16:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC).

Proposed deletion of Steven Joseph
Hello, Runningonbrains, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, Steven Joseph, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! ... disco spinster   talk  21:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Steven Joseph
Hello, Runningonbrains, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Articles for deletion/Steven Joseph whether the article Steven Joseph should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Steven Joseph, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! ... disco spinster   talk  22:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Question - Mass Updates of Climate Data
Hello...

I posted a request regarding climate data here WikiProject Meteorology. In going through this section, it looks like you've got a meteorological background. I would love your opinion if you get a moment. I committed a newbie faux pas by posting without properly reaching consensus.

Right now, just looking for feedback. If I touch a page, I get plenty of feedback :-). Seems like things are a bit slower in the talk project pages, so thought I'd get more active in asking folks to sound off.

If reaching out is a Wiki faux pas, please chalk it up to not knowing the community. I know weather normals and averages, but I'm still new on Wiki.

Thank you.

Frisch1 (talk) 05:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)Frisch1