Jump to content

Talk:Tropical Storm Fay (2008)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Complacency in Florida

[edit]

NYTimes says Floridians aren't preparing well, for a number of reasons. Let's hope the story doesn't become very relevant. Plasticup T/C 15:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We need a prep bit for that. Itfc+canes=me (talk) 16:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itfc+canes=me (talk • contribs) [reply]
And if it never affects Florida then complacency in Florida is irrelevant. Plasticup T/C 00:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We will include it if it does..... Itfc+canes=me (talk) 10:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why should it be included? This is not a newspaper or editor's column or pundit show, this is an article of information, and the opinion of complacency should not be included. It is not neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 14:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Fay & xkcd

[edit]

Hurricane Fay is humorously similar in direction and habit to screw-it-let's-just-trash-florida-again from the xkcd comic upcoming hurricanes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.232.204.10 (talk) 23:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


DR Transit Accident

[edit]

23 people were killed in DR in a bus accident due to the rains of Fay. I added them to the death count. I'm not sure if these deaths would be direct or indirect: I guessed indirect. And I really couldn't figure out how to make the refs as fancy as the other ones, but their there in any case. 24.224.188.118 (talk) 23:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They would definitely be indirect. CrazyC83 (talk) 00:51, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes definitely indirect.... i'm gonna prep a template for when/if this thing dies. Itfc+canes=me (talk) 10:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They are not related. I am in the DR, and this happened before it even began raining. It was cloudy, yes, but it was not raining yet. Please make the proper correction. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.80.140.2 (talk) 21:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I second that. The accident happened in the early morning, but the storm was pouring heavy rainfall on that zone by the afternoon. The rain did not contribute to those accidents at all. 64.32.82.183

Template for fay's death

[edit]
{{Infobox Hurricane
| Name=Tropical Storm Fay
| Type=Tropical storm
| Year=2008
| Basin=Atl
| Image location=Fay 19 August 2008.jpg
| Image name=Fay striking the Dominican Republic 
| Formed=[[August 15]], [[2008]]
| Dissipated=Still Active
| 1-min winds=55
| Pressure=986
| Damages=
| Fatalities=14 direct, 1 indirect
| Areas=[[Dominican Republic]], [[Haiti]], [[Cuba]] , [[Florida]]
| Hurricane season=[[2008 Atlantic hurricane season]]
}}

Itfc+canes=me (talk) 10:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC) (minor changes) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it a bit early for all this? We won't be needing it for several days yet, and when we do we can easily draw it up in about 90 seconds. Plasticup T/C 18:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

updated using best track info from NRL Jason Rees (talk) 04:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Life as an Invest and as "The Joker"

[edit]

Would it be appropriate to add to the article that this system was tracked for several days as NHC Invest that many in the meteorological press (such as Wunderground's Jeff Masters) dubbed "The Joker" due to it's quirkiness? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.119.40 (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. I've only seen Jeff Masters refer to it as "The Joker". In any event, unless the media picks up the name, the term doesn't warrant inclusion. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone

Article Importance

[edit]

Under the Importance guidelines which are located Here it is rated as a High Class as at least 117 people have died Jason Rees (talk) 20:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although those guidelines suggest that a storm which caused as many deaths as Fay would be high-importance, they are simply guidelines, and are in no way official. That said, we have to take common sense into account with this one. Sadly, tropical cyclones regularly cause as many deaths as Fay did in Hispaniola, thus, it isn't a rare or unprecedented event, and unless there is significant damage in Florida or in the Southeast U.S., the storm deserves mid-importance at the most. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also those are almost entirely indirect deaths. Excluding those it is clearly a Low importance storm. This is as unremarkable as Atlantic tropical storms can be. Anything other than Low importance is totally unjustified. Somehow every storm that impacts the US gains a contingent pushing for "High" importance - I shouldn't have to remind everyone that this is an international encyclopedia, and as global tropical cyclones go, this storm is nothing. Hurricane Dean is Mid importance. Tropical Storm Fay isn't even close to being in the same league. Plasticup T/C 23:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As I've said, generally, WPTC's importance assessments are too low, so I would support {{Mid-Importance}} here. I'm not sure {{High-Importance}} is warranted yet; we can wait for the final landfall to figure that out. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 23:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The category is made up of tropical cyclones; most of them should be low-importance, IMO, with high-importance reserved for articles that aren't about a specific hurricane.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why write the article while the storm is active?

[edit]

Why don't people wait to write articles like this until after the storm is over? It seems ridiculous that people need to keep updating it as the storm progresses. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not an ongoing weather report, right? 209.247.22.166 (talk) 17:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the advantage of waiting until it is over? I can't think of any, but the disadvantages are significant: we lose time-sensitive information, editors interest wanes, and readers interest weakens too. So the better question is, why wait? Plasticup T/C 17:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe because if editors' interest will wane and readers' interest will weaken, it wasn't much of a worthwhile subject in the first place. Not everything needs an article in Wikipedia! 67.79.157.50 (talk) 17:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that not everything needs and article, but are you suggesting that this event is not notable? It is natural that interest will wane, but I don't think that has much of a bearing on the article's notability. The United States presidential election, 2004 isn't as popular as it used to be, and United States presidential election, 2008 will eventually go the same way, but does that mean they shouldn't be included? Plasticup T/C 17:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Most everything is an article, and a lot of articles that should not be are, so why would this tropical storm not be an article? The only reason why some storms do not have articles are: they probably did not impact land, did not hamper local life, or there is not enough information. This storm has/will impact the entire state of florida, every county, city, and person. That is very rare, at least some corner of florida is left out of it. However this time its not, not to mention this is an unusually slow and resilient storm that should of died days ago over land, but unforunately it did not. Mind you that the point of this discussion was not originally "should this be an article". Articles are best written at the moment to get as much information as you can. Information is lost over time, there's always confusion in articles and events that happened even 10-15 years ago. When i went to school there were varying dates and years when the cold war ended, or when certain events happened like MLK Jr's death and what not. To preserve the accuracy of events is to write them as they happen and polish later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 02:26, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Humans will literally bicker about anything. Wikipedia seems to be a magnet for this social oddity.--Biturica (talk) 05:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you have nothing to contribute to the discussion constructively Biturica, then please do not say anything at all.
There was nothing constructive going on in this section, why don't you elevate it a notch yourself instead of being distracted by my addition of more of the same. This self-important indulgence in pseudo-editing isn't granting the world any new knowledge.--Biturica (talk) 03:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its hammering out fine details, why dont you go and troll something else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Preparations

[edit]

The Wall Street Journal give a high level overview. It also estimates only 14 deaths. Plasticup T/C 12:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers vary widely between sources. Until the NHC gives a reliable estimate, best to use the normal standard of a compilation of all sources. It is possible that the 80 dead by being swept away on vehicles may go down as indirect, but the description of "swept away" is usually direct as it is caused by flooding. CrazyC83 (talk) 14:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The sources I read made it sound like the bus crashed. Also, are those 80 confirmed dead? I thought that most of the "missing" had survived. Plasticup T/C 14:55, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Source 25 says an accurate count was impossible and the number of bodies so far is 3. The 30 was classified as a mistake if I read it correctly. Also I find it suspicious that the same river got 30 and 50. I think these are the same accident and the total deaths counted as '80' in the article is in fact 3 with an unknown number missing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.33.111.74 (talk) 16:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bus accident in the Dominican Republic was totally unrelated. The citation didn't even mention the weather, let alone a Tropical Storm. Plasticup T/C 00:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado table

[edit]

Does this article really need a table listing every single possible tornado? Seems like way too much detail for an encyclopedia article. 4.154.3.138 (talk) 23:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not limited in the same way as a dead tree encyclopedia. That said, if they continue at this rate I hope they will be split off into a separate article. Plasticup T/C 23:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, I tried to hide it but it was re-added. A split article is unlikely to be warranted at this point (maybe on 2nd landfall if an outbreak happens - based on WP Severe Weather standards as if this was any other system). I think it should be removed and the text of the more notable ones incorporated into the impact section. CrazyC83 (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice to see inclusion of tornadic weather in South Carolina spawned by a distant Fay. --Biturica (talk) 05:35, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should put the Tornado table in the article because Fay has spawned the most tornadoes of any tropical storm. Just my opinion. (Hurricaneguy (talk) 01:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Photos

[edit]

I live in Daytona Beach, Florida, and started to upload some photos to Wikimedia. Not much to see as yet. Gamweb (talk) 08:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Tropical_Storm_Fay_(2008)[reply]

Very cool. It looks like most of our impacts are going to be water-related, so could you get us a picture of the ocean? Waves breaking on the beach, that kind of thing. Thanks a bunch. Oh, and if you happen to see one of these tornadoes... ;-) Plasticup T/C 14:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you happen to see one of those tornadoes, run to safety, then worry about the pictures. If it catches you, it will probably destroy the camera, and then where would be? :-) --Prosfilaes (talk) 15:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I took this one on the 19th. The professional paparazzi just happened to be these as I approached... http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:2008Fay-DaytonaBeach4.jpg Gamweb (talk) 19:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added an image from Merritt Island - if anyone wants me to upload more, email me please, thanks. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very nice picture, thanks. Plasticup T/C 11:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US Navy Meteorology & Oceanography Tropical Support Center

[edit]

I added a link to the US Navy Meteorology & Oceanography Tropical Support Center. Since the Navy is a branch of the US Government, you should be able to have free use of any of their images. There is an archive of "warning maps" going back about 8 years on that site. Gamweb (talk) 18:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alligator on the loose in Melbourne, Florida

[edit]

http://www.local6.com/weather/17244086/detail.html?1 Gamweb (talk) 05:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some trees were knocked down

[edit]

"a tornado was reported on Big Coppitt Key, where some trees were knocked down." - I removed this as it is most likely subtle vandalism. My first impulse was to remove it without comment, but figured I'd better check to see if this was reported and the author simply forgot a reference. However, I could not find a reference for this.

This points out the extra vigilence we need to have on current events to insist on sources as the frequent edits, especially if they sound "plausible" can make Wikipedia look stuipd and our saving grace is to remember that Wikipedia is a tertiary source that needs to rely on reliable sources not primary sources or "I heard that" news. --Trödel 19:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I follow. Why do you suspect that a claim of downed trees is vandalism? –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because trees being knocked down during a tropical storm is not notable. --Trödel 20:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. Especially considering the intensity of this particular tropical cyclone was not great, a mention of trees down is an informative and useful piece of information. Also, the trees down were a result of the tornado, not Fay itself. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, the SPC report backs up that statement. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But that is a primary source first of all - we should be quoting reliable secondary sources, secondly mention on SPC doesn't even make it notable, thirdly, SPC only supports that one TREE was knocked down not "some trees". --Trödel 20:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Storm Prediction Center is most certainly a reliable secondary source. If a work of the the U.S. Federal Government is not a reliable source, nothing is. Sure, the SPC only mentions one tree was knocked down, but is that a reason enough to delete the entire statement from the article? Why not make the small edit to correct the article? If notability is in fact your reason given for the removal of that content, then please explain to me how a downed tree is not notable. Sure, in the Hurricane Katrina article a downed tree is left for the subarticles, or doesn't even merit inclusion at all. Yet in an article where the impact section will most likely be limited to small claims of impacts such as that, then yes, a downed tree is notable enough for inclusion. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is it "trees down" to which you object, or the tornado, or other? I agree "trees down" is not notable - trees are down in my yard, for crying out loud. A tree in Daytona fell on a car and totaled it. I can find the news story about that. No tornadoes were involved in most of the tree downings, but the tornados are worth mentioning IMO. What say we mention the tornadoes and skip the trees? That's a little like saying "There was a record amount of ranfall, and the ground became very wet". KillerChihuahua?!? 21:29, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To mention the tornadoes and not the associated effects would limit the comprehensiveness of the article. It would be similar to confining this very article to "Tropical Storm Fay hit land". –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Actually, "a tornado was reported on Big Coppitt Key," is notable enough. The "where some trees were knocked down" part is arguable, but it is a description of the damaged caused by that particular tornado, and saying that a tornado occurred without saying what it did is somewhat of a cliffhanger. If it seems too trivial, you can always say, "where it caused minimal damage" if that's all the tornado did. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think Trödel is getting mixed up on notability. The trees being blown down is not notable in the sense that it does not warrant its own article, but it is still worthy of inclusion. For instance, in a biography article we usually mention that the person has a mother, even though the mother may not be notable in and of herself. Plasticup T/C 17:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rainfall

[edit]

From someone who lives in Central Florida and regards wiki to be my sanctuary for hurricane info, this article hasn't even touched on the rainfall impact that this storm as had on the region. This rainmaker has been here for 3 days going on 4 and poor Melbourne has gotten over 30+ inches of rain. Try the Orlando Sentinel's web page or even TWC's page for some info on the damage and photos of submerged cars and fallen trees. Fay is a freak of nature to all of us here cause she will not go away and the public here is absolutely gone mad because of it. Just about two hours ago the strongest winds of the storm came through Orlando and surrounding areas, however, we have been dealing with the storm for 72+ hours. Altarboy420 (talk) 00:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I live in orlando, and to be honest, right now the rainfall impact cannot be measured up yet. We have to wait till the storm has completely passed us before we can add nearly any worthwhile information about the impact of the rainfall, we might have to wait a few weeks as with all other hurricanes, to gauge the gigantic impact of any storm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 02:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is why you should not use Wikipedia as a replacement for your local weather service. We are writing an encyclopedia, not a newspaper, and speed is not our goal. Plasticup T/C 10:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weather Services dont cover indepth the impact of storms, only the current information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 14:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

60 Homes flooded in Volusia County: http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Headlines/frtHEAD01CANE082208.htm Gamweb (talk) 15:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Areas just to the east of Tallahassee, FL have the possibility to join Melbourne in the 30 inch rainfall club. There are already radar estimates of almost two feet of rain, with rainfall rates over 4 inches per hour as the storms are training constantly, and the forecast shows another foot of rain to fall by the time fay leave Florida alone. Also, Melbourne may pass the three foot mark, the edges of Fay, outer bands, have been dumping more rain over south/central Florida, some with rainfall rates of 2 inches per hour. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Records?

[edit]

Fay must have broken some kind of record by now, for instance its about to move out and hit the state for a 3rd time, i cant think of a storm that impacted 3 times on the same state. Also the rainfall must be records highs for florida. Anyway, i cant find any records but im not looking hard enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 02:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon in 1994 comes to mind... Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 02:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well it broke that record. First recorded storm to make landfall on florida 4 times (probably the only state to have that) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 14:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deaths

[edit]
Fay killed five in Florida: http://news.yahoo.com/story//ap/20080822/ap_on_re_us/tropical_weather_fay Itfc+canes=me (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Impact - worthy of a seperate article?

[edit]

Could the impact be worth of a seperate article yet? I think so... its on my sandbox Itfc+canes=me (talk) 15:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why would it need a separate article? Right now this storm is utterly insignificant except for its impact in Florida, and its impact there is not exceptional. I don't understand how you would justify that article. Plasticup T/C 16:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You Live in Florida with 2 feet of water then tell me it's not significant. Also this is exceptional a T.S. lasting this long and not moving yeah. It worthy but I don't think it need one.
1) It de-clutters the article... lately it has been looking increasingly cluttered.

2) There is enough infomation on the impact to create 1 - we know most things OR we could split the impact to the different areas. Itfc+canes=me (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is shorter than average. It is 23kb long. If it reaches 80–90kb then we can start talking about splitting it up. Plasticup T/C 17:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Plasticup, there are longer articles out there that are not sperated. Not to say that this is not in anyway insignificant, Florida has 3 major ports for the us (Miami, Jacksonville, Tampa) not to mention numerous military installations. This disrupts quite a bit, not to mention an entire state has pretty much stopped in its tracks for almost a week now (the 4th most populous state i might add) is siginifcant in itself. Still though, this article is not worthy of being sperated into two parts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.32.27 (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ok... end of discussion..... i have these for you to put in the article i don't know how to: http://news.yahoo.com/story//ap/20080823/ap_on_re_us/tropical_weather_fay and http://news.yahoo.com/story//afp/20080822/ts_alt_afp/usweatherstorm Itfc+canes=me (talk) 12:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


11 dead in florida, one dead in georgia

[edit]

http://news.yahoo.com/story//ap/20080823/ap_on_re_us/tropical_weather_fay Itfc+canes=me (talk) 19:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One person drowned in georgia in a drainage ditch filled with several inches of rain from Fay.

http://www.wfxl.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=179455 Rvk41 (talk) 02:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

23 in Haiti and the DR [1] Including the one in Jamaica, the total should be 36?Potapych (talk) 02:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba's impact

[edit]

Uh... guys where is it. I can't find any sources so HELP! Itfc+canes=me (talk) 10:41, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've found a bit on preparation in Cuba. [2] It's a google translated page. I'll keep searching for more Cyclonebiskit (talk) 13:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Louisiana

[edit]

What's with the sharp turn being predicted at Louisiana? Assuming it's not some bizarre joke somewhere, what could make the storm make that kind of turn?--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The turn isn't that sharp. Fay is forecast to stall for 12 hours near Louisiana then the cold front that is approaching should pick it up and Fay will move along the front at a good clip. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fay Dissipated?

[edit]

Can we had the offical template for TS Fay now since it is a remnant low? (Hurricaneguy (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Yep as soon as the NHC or the HPC says it is now a remeant low we can put the template up Jason Rees (talk) 00:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like we jumped the gun. NHC just issued another advisory on Fay. Plasticup T/C 14:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado Section Likely Required

[edit]

Fay now holds another record, most tornadoes spawned by a Tropical Storm (not hurricane) with 41 tornadoes since it hit the Florida Keys. The number of confirmed is not high enough to require it's own article but it's a big note for this storm. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:46, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a separate article is not warranted at this point, since most were weak and it was spread out over a week. However, if the numbers grow or if there is a highly destructive and deadly tornado in there, then it might be. A section (minus the charts) would be warranted though. CrazyC83 (talk) 23:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can you include all of the tornadoes in the main article? If not, then it has satisfied the criteria for being split off into a separate article. Just keep adding them until you feel that the section has become too unwieldy and then split 'er off. Plasticup T/C 00:31, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that if there is an EF3, more than 3 EF2's, or >50 total, it gets it's own article. For now, there's not many that have been confirmed. I've only seen 5 confirmed, 1 EF2, 4 EF0. There are probably others but I haven't seen them. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right now I have found 16 Fay-related tornadoes (1 EF2, 10 EF1's and 5 EF0's) and no fatalities (only three injuries) which does not warrant an article using the Severe Weather project standards. CrazyC83 (talk) 00:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The severe weather criteria are for pure tornado events. This is different, and if the main article (i.e. this one) cannot contain all of the information that we wish to provide then it should be split into a new article. Criteria, standards, guidelines, etc are not one-size-fits-all fixes. Plasticup T/C 14:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The TCR suggested there were over 80 Fay-related tornadoes, which would clearly warrant a separate article (my count from NCDC archives was 49 which is borderline). Should an article be created? CrazyC83 (talk) 04:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think one could be made. I worked on one for Hurricane Cindy (2005) a while ago and it had under 50 tornadoes. I'm sure you'll be able to get much more information than I could though. Cyclonebiskit 05:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rainfall graphic done

[edit]

Since the circulation dissipated on the 28th, and the rainfall files were available the 29th, work has continued on the spreadsheet. The graphic was being drawn up this afternoon, but due to the density of observations, it only was 1/5 complete by the time I left (even after staying over.) Expect the graphics done in the morning, with the web page up in the afternoon. Thegreatdr (talk) 01:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is done and on the page. Thegreatdr (talk) 15:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Todo

[edit]

Preps/aftermath, damage total, cites for everything. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a question: do you think it could become the next Allison and be retired? I read somewhere on this page that it killed 114 people. You should make a Fay death toll template that proves it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.253.110 (talk) 13:56, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article says 36 deaths. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 14:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This IP is asking about the retirement of every storm to impact the US this year. Plasticup T/C 00:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damage?

[edit]

Why is there no damage amount avaliable in Florida? Fay most certainly caused severe damage in Florida, but why isn't a specific cost shown? Was the storm so wet for the state that the damage total will not be known fore sure, but was extreme? Are some areas not able to be reached due to the flooding caused by Fay? I wanted an answer of why the damage total in Florida remains unknown.

Because it hasn't been calculated. We are waiting for the National Hurricane Center's Tropical Cyclone Report. Plasticup T/C 23:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When will this report come out? Later this month? October? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.163.233 (talk) 00:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't usually a specific timescale. Sometimes, the report isn't available until the very next year. Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 06:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Hurricane Felix's damage report didn't get out until spring of 2008 as well, so it must be hard to calculate the damage total. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.183.151 (talk) 19:56, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Fay won't take as long as Felix because it was a much less significant storm and because data collection/organization/presentation is much better in America than in Nicaragua. But I wouldn't expect it before November/December. Plasticup T/C 02:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean damage can't be hard to estimate. Many areas in Florida got about 30 to even 40 inches of rain from Fay, so some areas can be hard to reach. I actually wouldn't be surprised to see the damage bill into the billions of dollars, seeing how many homes were destroyed and how many trees and power lines were downed. It was like Tropical Storm Allison for the entire state of Florida. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.235.209.99 (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The damage report has came out, at least 180 million in damage. 76.236.187.191 (talk) 15:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement

[edit]

This storm has caused at least 180 million dollars in damage. I'm not sure if it will be retired, but could we give this storm the main article? It appears to be a very destructive storm. The damage was only estimated to be at least 180 million, so it could be higher than that. True, 180 million in damage appears low, but for a tropical storm, it's pretty impressive. Should we move the page to Tropical Storm Fay? 76.236.187.191 (talk) 15:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, we can't unless it is confirmed to have been retired. It should stay as Tropical Storm Fay (2008) for the time being. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying the name Fay will be retired; i'm saying it's likely. 180 million in damage is the least possible number it cam be. Therefore, that can't be an overestimate, but it could be an underestimate. Fay is the third most destructive tropical storm on record in the Atlantic Basin, behind 2001's Allison and 1979's Claudette. It's not everyday you see a Tropical Storm do 1/5 of a billion dollars in damage or greater. I think Fay has about as much of a chance of retirement as Dolly and Hanna this year as well. 76.236.187.191 (talk) 15:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There were several more damaging tropical storms than Fay. Tropical Storm Gabrielle in 2001 caused $230 million in damage in Florida (later became a hurricane). Tropical Storm Ernesto in 2006 (previously a hurricane) caused $500 million in damage in the eastern US. Tropical Storm Alberto in 1994 caused $534 million (1994 USD, $772M 2008 USD). Frances in 1998 caused $500 million in damage. Fay clearly was not the third most destructive TS on record in the Atlantic. There's an outside chance it would be retired, but we'll leave that up to the WMO, since I personally don't find it that likely. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, edit conflict. Hink, you used the same examples I was going to use! Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, forget that. Still, 180 million was most likely an underestimate. By the way, Ernesto and Gabrielle reached Hurricane Status. I was just saying Fay would be one of the most destructive Atlantic storms that never reached it, whether or not their impacts were as a tropical storm only. I highly doubt that 180 million was the actual damage toll. My biggest estimate would be Dolly's damage toll: 1.5 billion. I think damage was somwhere around 1 billion. Since the NHC doubles the estimates as overall damage, 360 million should be put down for damage, not 180 million. Even 360 million could be too low. The biggest total damage from my perspective is at least half a billion. 76.236.187.191 (talk) 16:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 180 million was a preliminary estimate from a few county totals, meaning it could go either way. However, it is a total estimate for each county, not an insured estimate. The NHC only doubles the insured estimates to get the total, so yes, 180 million is still the current value. Yes, Ernesto and Gabrielle reached hurricane status, but they caused the majority of their impact as a tropical storm. There's little difference, after all, between a strong TS and a minimal hurricane. Time will tell how much damage from Fay will be, but it's not up to us to speculate now. ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you're right. We should wait until the final damage report has been released. 76.236.187.191 (talk) 18:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1.80 billion sounds more reasanadle. Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home ,Sandbox[ 21:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does that even mean? ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:53, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
$1.8 billion sounds like a better damage total to Evan. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This might be sort of outdated (with the entirety of the discussion being four days ago), but I think $1.8 billion may be an overestimate. But I do agree with Evan on one aspect; I do find it believable that Fay would be a billion-dollar storm (which would make Fay Florida's first billion-dollar TS, BTW). My estimate is around $1 billion. $1.4 billion tops. --Dylan620 (Home • yadda yadda yadda • Ooooohh!) 22:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alison caused more floding and reached 2 billion.Leave Message ,Yellow Evan home ,Sandbox[ 00:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, this conversation is not constructive towards the article and should be discontinued. If you want to continue this conversation please talk at hurricanes.wikia Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, we can discuss about this later when the official damage total comes out. Now is not the time for this. Assuming Fay's damage being 1 billion or so is violating the WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOR laws. We will wait until the official damage report has come until discussing about this. 99.52.153.15 (talk) 16:26, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NCDC event reports for August have been released, damages are about $180 million. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the NHC's total, which is what matters. We'll wait still. 76.235.165.167 (talk) 22:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Until the TCR comes out, the damage total from NCDC is fine. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 22:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess so, although I doubt it actually caused that much damage. 76.236.191.27 (talk) 05:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:V, we write what reliable sources tell us, not what we believe is correct. –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 14:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the TCR just came out, and it looks like Fay missed the $1 billion mark. I don't think Fay will be retiried, although it isn't completely out of the question. ANDROS1337 01:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Record citation?

[edit]

Why are there citation needed signs in the records section of this article? It doesn't need any citation because there is a place to back it up, which are in the main article for this season. Why is there citation? 76.235.217.70 (talk) 17:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information from another article cannot be used as a source for facts in this article. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 03:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, okay, but Fay was one of the wettest single tropical storms for the southeastern U.S. (not the wettest, but one of the wettest). Also, I can't find any other Tropical Storm exept Nicholas of ' 03 and Laura of ' 71 with a higher ACE than Fay, so I don't think there needs to be any citation there. 76.235.217.70 (talk) 13:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There has to be a citation, regardless of what you can find. See WP:OR. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:06, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, it's just that I can't find any storms other than Nicholas of 2003 and Laura of 1971 with a higher ACE than Fay, but I can't find any reference to back it up. Also, I have found only a few storms that were wetter than Fay for the southeastern U.S. but that is just origional research and should be removed. Do you know a possible reference to back up the ACE of Fay? 76.235.165.167 (talk) 03:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of wettest tropical cyclones in the United States. ACE is on the verge of being removed per discussions at WP:TC. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:18, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ACE is acceptable for storms with notable rankings. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 04:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Fay was one of them. It had an ACE of 6.72, being the third highest of any Tropical Storm in the Atlantic (that didn't reach hurricane strength), behind Laura of 71 and Nicholas of 03. 3rd place is notable, in my perspective, at least. 76.235.165.167 (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree, but we need a reliable source which verifies that. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 15:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but I can't find a reference on that, and I wanted to know if someone else can. 76.235.165.167 (talk) 22:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The appropriate references within the TC rainfall project (used within the US TC rain article) can be used as validation. For Florida, it's this link. For Georgia, the Carolinas, and Tennesssee, it's this link, and for the remainder of the Gulf coast it's this link. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Tropical Storm Fay (2008). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tropical Storm Fay (2008). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge 2008 Tropical Storm Fay tornado outbreak?

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge Tropical Storm Fay tornado outbreak into Tropical Storm Fay (2008). (non-admin closure) Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is literally less than 3,000 words. Even though it was a decently notable tornado outbreak, it can be comfortably contained in this article. 155.190.18.45 (talk) 12:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm going to fix the mistake first. I khow which going to deleted. Maybe 2008 Tropical Storm Fay tornado outbreak's deletion? MYSKaoi (talk) 10:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC) — MYSKaoi (talk · contribs) is currently under sockpuppet investigation. Happily888 (talk) 01:20, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tropical_Storm_Fay_(2008)&oldid=1257536744"