Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subtropical Storm Stephanie


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. MER-C 12:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Subtropical Storm Stephanie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I am requesting the deletion of Subtropical Storm Stephanie as there was not a subtropical storm named Stephanie. The name Stephanie was assigned by the Adopt a Vortex project of FU Berlin to an mid-latitude area of low pressure, which several unofficial sources thought may have been a subtropical storm. The author has claimed that RSMC La Reunion monitored the system as a subtropical storm, but they do not monitor the Atlantic operationally and thus did not warn on it. Jason Rees (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ I totally agree with Jason Rees. This is at the most a mid-latitude low pressure not much noteworthy. Pierre cb (talk) 22:21, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Wouldn't this have been in the news cycle at least somewhat if it were true? I don't recall hearing anything about this at all.Dohvahkiin (talk) 12:05, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes and no - some subtropical and tropical cyclones do not make news headlines.Jason Rees (talk) 15:14, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Just had a look at this, and it appears météo-france (of which RSMC is a subdivision) reported it to be 'Dépression subtropicale Stéphanie' and referred to it twice on social media here and here. Though it was indeed initially named through the FU Berlin project, the official french national meteorological service also adopted the name and categorised it as a subtropical storm. The naming system by FU Berlin has been used in previous articles such as here. The reason the NHC or RSMC La Reunion didn't report on the storm is simply because the Bay of Biscay falls outside their designated basins. Meteorologically speaking, this storm exhibited tropical storm force winds as shown by this ASCAT pass, and had a warm core closed circulation. If tropical depressions in the middle of the atlantic that have zero newsworthy impact such as TD9 last year require a mention, this storm ought to in some capacity. Whether it requires an article of its own is a different question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.12.222 (talk) 12:26, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you will find that Stephanie would not have been outside of the United States National Hurricane Centres area of responsibility, as they monitor the whole Atlantic including the Bay of Biscay and the North Sea. In fact you will find that the NHC initiated advisories on TS Grace, while it was located near 43N 18W. Personally I am happy to include the FU Berlin naming system in articles where appropriate and I would also be happy to add Stephanie to the 2016 AHS under a rule that we use to include systems in articles where the official RSMC has not monitored them but another NMHSS has. However, to do this we have to cite an advisory from the NMHSS themselves where they have called it a subtropical storm and then can not be putting in any met details, unless they come from a reliable source.Jason Rees (talk) 15:13, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Admins, I think that you can close this, it's fairly obvious that the consensus is to delete. Jdcomix (talk) 23:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I could find absolutely no reliable source to support even the topic title, leave alone the article's contentions. Lourdes  07:21, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.