text:
Talk:2005 Atlantic hurricane season/August

Week 1
So we come into August with a quiet Atlantic. How long can this last??? CrazyC83 22:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The tropical weather outlook is pretty busy atm. -- tomf688  23:04, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

We've still got 92L.INVEST pulling away from the Greater Antilles but not expected to do anything, 93L.INVEST now just inside the Caribbean looking all spirally but not very strong, and 94L.INVEST so far out in the Atlantic that they're pointing European weather satellites at it. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:36, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Florida isn't scared, but it could be interesting to watch if these systems decide to do anything. 92L could develop over the next few days, 93L probably won't do anything, and 94L may become a subtropical cyclone in the next few days.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:39, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

With exception to the potential subtropical storm, it looks like the tropics will be quiet for a bit longer. More Saharan dust is getting picked up, drying up the ITCZ. Current water vapor satellite image. --Holderca1 17:55, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Mmhh... Doesn't more dust induce more water condensation and clouds? Awolf002 18:10, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Some dust, yes. Too much sand, no. Like everything else in nature, it's a delicate balance. --Golbez 18:57, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

The disturbance near Bermuda is looking better organized. --Holderca1 17:37, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

08L.Harvey
92L Invest, after a lot of wandering around being sheared, did get better organized and is now TD #8. Kitesailor 20:09, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Not so, says the National Hurricane Center.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 20:13, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Check NRL/FMNOC. 08L.TDEIGHT. I assume that's a placeholder name til 08L.NONAME or something, it's a bit off-standard. --Golbez 20:29, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

The National Hurricane Center has not issued warnings on this system. That means that a tropical cyclone has not formed. While the Navy site has it listed as 8L NONAME, they have no satellite photoes available nor do they have a track map posted. Again, these are good, if not certain indicators that a tropical cyclone has not yet formed.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 20:36, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Quite right; the NHC hasn't issued warnings. But the NRL either seems to always have the first responsibility for designating these things, or they simply update their site with NOAA info faster than the NHC does. After all, the Hurricane Hunters are part of the military. They'd know first. --Golbez 20:40, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Turns out, you guys were only a few minutes premature. Tropical Depression Eight has formed and is heading toward Bermuda. It is expected to strengthen to a Tropical Storm Harvey. Permission to swear?

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 20:44, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Remember that the Navy has a large interest in staying on top of tropical cyclone development (the N in NOGAPS doesn't stand for NHC). This will help prevent future swearing. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:12, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I was referring to the fact that an eighth tropical depression has formed in the Atlantic, not the fact that the Navy site was premature, which is now a moot point.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:25, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * And Cyrius is pointing out that they weren't premature. It was the NHC who was late. :) --Golbez 21:27, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Well someone actually has to write an public and forcast advisories and the discussion as well as prepare the forcast track. That doesn't just appear out of thin air.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:38, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

From the 11pm advisory:

"Harvey refuses to weaken"

Stubbern storm.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:00, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

09L.Irene
Hehehe. Classic Cape Verde tropical wave. This could get really interesting if that develops.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 00:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

A LOW PRESSURE CENTER ASSOCIATED WITH A TROPICAL WAVE IS PRODUCING A LARGE AREA OF DISTURBED WEATHER ABOUT 400 MILES WEST-SOUTHWEST OF THE CAPE VERDE ISLANDS. SATELLITE IMAGES INDICATE THAT THIS SYSTEM IS GRADUALLY BECOMING BETTER ORGANIZED...AND A TROPICAL DEPRESSION COULD FORM DURING THE NEXT DAY OR TWO AS IT MOVES TOWARD THE WEST-NORTHWEST OVER THE EASTERN ATLANTIC.

 * Between the Atlantic discussions, the TWO, the "invest" declaration, and the satellite images I've seen, this one's got nowhere to go but up... The Great Zo 02:16, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Well she_at.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 02:32, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Could this be Irene? Right from the beginning of the season, I felt Irene would be one of the bad storms of the season, going by the fact that in each of the last four seasons, the "I" storm was a devastating one...if Irene is retired, they may be starting to run out of "I" names since that would be 5 straight! CrazyC83 04:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It's going to need to move west a bit before it hits good tropical cyclone fuel, water in the eastern Atlantic is relatively cool right now, it appears. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:07, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, the tropical outlook says that conditions are favorable for development and that a tropical depression could form in the next couple of days. bob rulz 07:46, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

 * Cyrius, I don't understand why you're saying the tropical water is cool. This image from the NOAA shows that temperatures in the Atlantic are indeed Above normal, as indicated by the Yellow's Orange's and Red's on the map.  Even the greens show a normal temperature level.  But, from this map, the temperatures in the east are definately warmer than the west. -- Bladeswin 18:27, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

 * The temperatures of the west Atlantic are warmer than the east, the band of 28+ degree waters is rather small in the east Atlantic and much broader in the west where it is at 29+ degrees. The western Atlantic will always be warmer than the eastern Alantic due to the clockwise current. SSTs --Holderca1 19:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * When I said "relatively cool", I meant relative to the water in the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico that has been fueling the season to date. That's a temperature anomaly map. It shows temperatures relative to the average for that date. What matters in a tropical system is actual temperature. 09L is sitting over 27C water right now, which isn't cold, but is a bit low to fuel a monster. Interesting side note, you can still see Emily's cool wake in that image. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

NRL has upgraded to Tropical Depression Nine. Waiting for NHC to issue a TCFA. (I know Tropical Cyclone Formation Alerts aren't issued anywhere but the WPac, but I like the term. :) --Golbez 19:43, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

...AND YET ANOTHER TROPICAL DEPRESSION IN THE ATLANTIC...

YES...INDEED WE HAVE ANOTHER TROPICAL DEPRESSION IN THE DEEP TROPICS.

If I hadn't looked at the byline, I've have thought Franklin wrote those. I think the TPC guys are getting punchy. --Golbez 20:41, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Who can blame them? The forcasts bring the depression to a moderate Category 1 hurricane in five days...headed west. We're in trouble.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 20:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Based on that five-day forecast, this is looking like one of three things: a Northeast or Mid-Atlantic hurricane, one headed for Bermuda and possibly Atlantic Canada, or possibly a fish-spinner. CrazyC83 21:36, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * And here I was thinking we were entering a lull in activity. :S -- tomf688  22:30, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

"Figured wrong Butch".

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 23:15, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

HOW LITTLE WE KNOW ABOUT THE GENESIS OF TROPICAL CYCLONES. SATELLITE IMAGES DURING THE DAY YESTERDAY SHOWED A DISTINCT DISTURBANCE IN THE DEEP TROPICS WITH ALL KNOWN FACTORS APPARENTLY FAVORABLE FOR THE SYSTEM TO BECOME A TROPICAL STORM. SURPRISINGLY THIS MORNING...VISIBLE IMAGES INDICATE THAT THE SYSTEM HAS BECOME DISORGANIZED. UNEXPECTEDLY...THE LOW-LEVEL CIRCULATION MOVED NORTHWESTWARD TOWARD RELATIVELY COOLER WATERS AND LOST MOST OF THE DEEP CONVECTION.

From the 11 am TD9 discussion. This one sounds like Franklin too, but it's Avila. :) Kitesailor 15:56, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Surprise! This thing fooled us again - instead of developing as expected, it just doesn't want to do anything! A stillborn storm perhaps? 24.226.10.99 16:29, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

The wave behind it is looking more impressive at this point. --Holderca1 17:39, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

 * An excellent example of jumping to conclusions too soon. -- tomf688  19:22, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree, if they first looked at this storm today, would they have called it a depression? Probably not.  --Holderca1 20:55, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

I think they would have designated it a depression. It still has good structure, it just lost some deep convection. Remember, the storm did not weaken, it still has winds of 30 mph, it just isn't strengthening like they expected it to.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 23:13, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know if I can agree with that assessment. The wind speeds have never been measured with this storm yet.  They have only estimated its intensity.  As we saw only a short time ago how far off those estimates can be when the WC-130 flew into Harvey and found winds ~20 knots higher than what they had estimated via satellite imagery.  So I don't really think that you can say that this storm hasn't weakened with respect to wind speeds with any degree of certainty. --Holderca1 13:17, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, apparently it's looking more impressive than it was on the satellite imagery. They bumped the intensity up to 35 mph. bob rulz 15:54, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

"Looks like the patient may live, doctor."

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 15:59, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

 * She's not giving up...I know of many storms that have taken a long time to develop then took off on the approach (although it would still need a lot of water left, storms rarely go into the extremely rapid deepening in the mid-Atlantic like they do in the Gulf or Caribbean with their 30-33°C SST's - it would take at least 18-24 hours for a storm to gain significant intensity) CrazyC83 02:53, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

She? It ain't named yet.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 02:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Now she is. It looks like it will either be a fish-spinner or a Northeast/Atlantic Canada storm... CrazyC83 19:19, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

July summary
The June summary was released at 8am on July 1, so I expect similar with July. I'm really looking forward to reading this. --Golbez 05:53, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * :( Neither basin has a July summary yet. --Golbez 19:26, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * There was more to summarize for July than was for June. -- tomf688  21:19, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

The eastern pacific shouldn't take that long. They only had Dora and Eugene.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:21, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Heh, I googled for the WMO header and found it. It was indeed released at 8am. It's not on NHC's site yet. Let's see..

THE MONTH OF JULY SAW UNPRECEDENTED TROPICAL CYCLONE ACTIVITY IN THE ATLANTIC BASIN...WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE NAMED STORMS... TROPICAL STORM CINDY...HURRICANE DENNIS...HURRICANE EMILY... TROPICAL STORM FRANKLIN...AND TROPICAL STORM GERT. THE PREVIOUS RECORD FOR NAMED STORMS THAT FORMED IN JULY WAS FOUR. THE TWO MAJOR HURRICANES THAT DEVELOPED DURING THE MONTH TIED A RECORD SET IN 1916. THE JULY ACTIVITY FOLLOWS AN UNUSUALLY ACTIVE MONTH OF JUNE ...AND THE SEVEN NAMED STORMS THAT HAVE FORMED THUS FAR IN 2005 REPRESENT A RECORD LEVEL OF ACTIVITY FOR THE FIRST TWO MONTHS OF THE SEASON.

So most notable about this is that Cindy was not posthumously upgraded to a hurricane. I figured it would be, apparently so did others, judging from edits.

SUMMARY TABLE NAME         DATES        MAX WIND   DEATHS   U.S. DAMAGE MPH               $MILLION -- TS CINDY     3-7  JUL        70        0          * H DENNIS     4-12 JUL       150       32+         * H EMILY     11-21 JUL       155        5+         * TS FRANKLIN 21-29 JUL        70        0 TS GERT     23-25 JUL        45        0 -- NOTE...DATES BASED ON COORDINATED UNIVERSAL TIME (UTC) *...ESTIMATE NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

So there we are. Dollar figures will probably be available in the tropical cyclone reports, which tend to come out two to three months after the storm, depending. (Otto died on Dec 3, TCR came out on Dec 7; Frances died Sept 8 and the TCR came out Dec 17) --Golbez 21:25, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * They haven't released the final reports - those come in the fall. My guess is Cindy will be upgraded to a hurricane then. Also I think that Emily will officially be upgraded to 160 mph, making it a Category 5, in the final reports. CrazyC83 00:21, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

August update
"The updated outlook calls for an extremely active season, with an expected seasonal total of 18-21 tropical storms (mean is 10), with 9-11 becoming hurricanes (mean is 6), and 5-7 of these becoming major hurricanes (mean is 2-3). The likely range of the ACE index for the season as a whole is 180%-270% of the median."

This really sucks. The NHC's estimates are usually conservative. And they predict 18-21 storms with a high rate of certainty. Floridians are liable to faint at first glance. I have never heard the NHC this nervous about a season. I am officially scared.

And, as if to prove their point, the broad surface low pressure system (92L Invest) is getting better organized and a tropical depression or tropical storm could form within the next 24-36 hours.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 20:07, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I think even those numbers are underestimated. My prediction is 22-25 named storms, 12-14 hurricanes and 8 major hurricanes. CrazyC83 22:45, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Horribly overestimated. Only one more storm... Harvey! -- tomf688  01:05, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

I wish.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 01:12, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Eek.
 * "Even though there has already been considerable early season activity (7 tropical storms, with two becoming major hurricanes), most of the activity is still expected to occur during the climatological peak months of August-October."

-- Cyrius|✎ 01:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

 * If this year has taught us anything, climatology doesn't mean sheet. ;) -- tomf688  01:49, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

09L.Irene (continued)
Looks like Irene doesn't know what she wants to do...could be an interesting week ahead? CrazyC83 05:05, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * On August 5th at ~1 AM PST, I made the half-arsed prediction that Irene would hit North Carolina, but with the August 10th 5 AM update, it looks like Irene could die out before reaching it. What do you guys think? RattleMan 08:59, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You don't have to ask people what they think, they'll tell you even if you don't want them to. Anyway, Franklin is saying that the forecasts have "very low confidence." Irene is so weak and disorganized that it is difficult to forecast. Strong storms tend to be more well-behaved. -- Cyrius|✎ 10:47, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, it looks like that if it survives it could hit somewhere from North Carolina to New England, or turn sharply to the northeast and remain a fish-spinner, but that's looking less likely with each new update. I believe that it may impact somewhere along there, but I doubt that it's going to be very powerful. bob rulz 11:03, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Irene is degenerating. Wait, it's getting better organized! Wait, it's degenerating. Wait, it's getting better organized! Wait, it's degenerating. Wait, it's getting better organized! Wait, it's degenerating. Wait, it's getting better organized! Wait, it's degenerating. etc etc etc etc The Great Zo 15:09, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * NC is very likely to be hit by this storm, possibly as a Cat 1. I should point out that the "I" storm was retired the last two years, and the last time "I" didn't reach hurricane strength was 1989. (There was no "I" storm in 91, 92, 93, 94, or 97; hey, that table I made at User:Golbez/sandbox paid off!)

 * I'm wondering if the NHC is wobbling on this because of measurement uncertainties. They seem to quote wind speed numbers with a "step" of 5 mph (30 - 35 - 40 - 45). Maybe that's very close to the actual uncertainty, and so the number is "clicking" up and down on a whim... Awolf002 15:20, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * They're wobbling because Irene is. Last night, Irene was barely visible on satellite imagery. As I write this, it is a few hours from fully looking like a tropical storm again. -- Cyrius|✎ 16:12, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I called it. -- Cyrius|✎ 04:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Right now it is looking like North Carolina as a Category 1-2 hurricane, although it is still too early to tell...she's fooled us so many times - not wanting to strengthen, then not wanting to die... CrazyC83 04:17, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I should point out that, even though Dr. Gray and the NHC updated their forecast to 21 storms, thusfar in August - the second most active month - we've had two weak tropical storms. Between Aug 1 and Aug 11 in 2004, we'd had a major hurricane, a rather strong tropical storm, and a category 4 monster. Maybe the season burnt out early and the forecasters overreacted. --Golbez 17:44, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

A hurricane hunter aircraft has found Irene a Hurricane. This will be reflected in the 11:00 advisory. Just as I had given up hope on the thing ever strengthening, too. (Edited 'cause somehow it showed up twice) The Great Zo 00:00, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Irene just broke a record: She was a tropical cyclone for 13 days before becoming a hurricane. This breaks Lisa's record of 11. That record stood for 10 months, 12 days, 12 hours and 30 minutes...approximatly of course.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 02:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

10L.NONAME
Looks like we have our possible tenth storm of the season... from the NHC:

"A WESTWARD-MOVING TROPICAL WAVE IS LOCATED ABOUT 1500 MILES EAST OF THE WINDWARD ISLANDS. THIS SYSTEM HAS SOME POTENTIAL FOR SLOW DEVELOPMENT OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS."

Boort 03:36, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

It's probably a bit reactionary to call any disturbance mentioned in the TWO "the possible nth storm of the season". Still, this one did seem to have a decent "twist" to it on satellite, despite the fact that decent-quality satellite images for that far out in the ocean don't exist. The Great Zo 03:55, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's now got an identifier attached to it. -- Cyrius|✎ 13:04, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

 * And now the TWO mentions Tropical Depression formation in the next day or two. Alright, forget trying to be "reasonable" and suggesting that we take a step back and not get too excited at every area of clouds that forms in the Atlantic - I am now convinced that any cloud in the Atlantic basin is now desitned to become a Tropical Storm. The Great Zo 15:27, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Still playing wait-and-see...most concerned about Irene right now. CrazyC83 02:22, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

 * As of right now... 96L has a very impressive circulation as apparent even on IR imagery... perhaps apparent, though, because it has lost every ounce of its deep convection! Probably just a normal cycle, but seems to be a bit extreme for such an oscillation. The Great Zo 05:25, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Current TWO "SATELLITE IMAGES INDICATE THAT A TROPICAL DEPRESSION APPEARS TO BE FORMING ABOUT 1000 MILES EAST OF THE LESSER ANTILLES. IF THIS TREND CONTINUES...ADVISORIES WILL BE INITIATED LATER TODAY. THIS SYSTEM IS EXPECTED TO MOVE SLOWLY TOWARD THE WEST-NORTHWEST OF NORTHWEST OVER OPEN ATLANTIC FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS." Seems that we will have Tropical Depression 10 soon! It already looks like a tropical depression on the satellite images.bob rulz 15:45, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * The latest model runs from the NHC list the disturbance as Tropical Depression Ten. It's official. The Great Zo 18:53, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

The NHC sounds uncertain if the depression even exists. Have you read their latest discussion?

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 00:02, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It looks fairly well-defined to me...looks like it will likely become Tropical Storm Jose tomorrow... CrazyC83 02:38, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * It should be José, with an accent... --Revolución (talk) 04:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

From the 11pm discussion:

"The depression is beginning to look like Irene-Junior as it undergoes southwesterly mid-level shear..."

Cute.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:39, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It's dead. If the circulation holds up it could regenerate in a few days... but despite what we've seen with Irene, that'd be an absolutely monumental task... The Great Zo 22:37, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

The tenth tropical depression of the season failed to hold up last year too. This one's track looks very similar to that of last year's TD Ten.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 23:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

The tenth TD last year formed near AZORES which is in the middle of the atlantic ocean. It is nothing like last years and it should actully regenrate it look like irene did last week it should not have been downgraded NONAME 15:37:24, 15 August 2005

 * Actually, it looks a lot less disorganized than Irene did last week. And it's similar to TD10 last year in the fact that it lasted less than a day before dissipating. bob rulz 16:18, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

This TD Ten may have a second chance. The NHC says the remnant low could redevelop in the next couple of days as it enters a more favorable environment.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:36, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

TD10 appears to be redeveloping. --Revolución (talk) 21:16, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

 * From the NHC:

 * "SATELLITE IMAGES AND REPORTS FROM AN AIR FORCE RESERVE UNIT RECONNAISSANCE AIRCRAFT INDICATE THAT THE AREA OF LOW PRESSURE NEAR THE NORTHERN LEEWARD ISLANDS...THE REMNANTS OF TROPICAL DEPRESSION TEN...HAS DEGENERATED INTO A TROPICAL WAVE. NO SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SYSTEM IS EXPECTED OVER THE NEXT DAY OR TWO."

 * -- RattleMan 21:31, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Dude, that was several days ago. The tropical weather outlook says it has the potential to redevelop in a day or so. I don't know what Rattleman's post was about.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:37, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm a bit confused...who are you talking to? Are you saying that the text I posted was several days old? Or in reference to TD10 redeveloping? I got that text from today's 5:30 PM EST update, here. -- RattleMan 22:13, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I was confused. That entry looked very similar to an outlook I'd seen a couple days ago. Shame, the Atlantic looks like it's going to stay boring for the next couple of days.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:12, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Week 4
There seems to be a few more systems trying to develop...how long can this break last? It's 2005, remember... CrazyC83 03:58, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

 * That tropical wave off Africa looks promising. It looks like we have three chances for a depression and a named storm:

 * 1) "AN AREA OF CLOUDINESS AND SHOWERS CENTERED A COUPLE OF HUNDRED MILES NORTH OF PUERTO RICO"

 * 2) "CLOUDINESS AND SHOWERS OVER THE EXTREME NORTHWESTERN CARIBBEAN SEA"

 * 3) "A STRONG TROPICAL WAVE [...] OFF THE WEST COAST OF AFRICA"

 * -- RattleMan 04:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

The NHC says the disturbance north of Puerto Rico won't amount to anything. The other two look promising. If the wave out of Africa becomes anything, it won't be tomorrow and not likely to be Tuesday. Our best chance is with the disturbance near the Yucatan Peninsula. A Hurricane Hunter is scheduled to pay it a visit tomorrow when it reaches the Bay of Campeche. It has until 6:00 am on Tuesday to develop or Jerry retains the record. I've been looking at the satellite pictures and the storm is now over the central Yucatan. It looks better organized than when I saw it last...

As for the wave out of Africa, they are using terms like 'strong' and 'vigorous'. That's not good. Those terms were used for waves that became beasts like Gilbert, Hugo, and Ivan. Then again, the last time they used those terms was for the wave that became Irene.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 16:41, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

97L.Invest
Area number 3 that RattleMan listed above... off the coast of Africa... is now 97L.Invest. I wish I could find some decent satellite imagery for that far out in the Atlantic. The Great Zo 05:07, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I found 1 and 2 and 3. BTW, where do you get your info on invests? I haven't found a central location for that yet... -- RattleMan 05:33, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

 * From the Navy's hurricane site, located here: http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/tc_pages/tc_home.html. Kind of an awkward site but it works. As for satellite images, those are pretty good. What I've always wondered though is why the satellite they've got pointed at that area only takes images every six hours. Does it just sit there for 5 hours and 59 minutes and then take a picture or something? The Great Zo 11:12, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

This wave is very well formed. NHC says several models turn it into a tropical cyclone. Compare the pictures that Rattleman provided to this:. This is the embryo that became Ivan. 97L looks even better formed than that. Note the number of the Invest that became Ivan: 98L. 97L actually formed after the Yucatan suspect area, so it should be 98L too in my opinion. This wave is creeping me out. (the link doesn't work. I'll fix it later)

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 16:56, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Does this link work? AySz88 ^ -  ^  02:06, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Looks like José or Katrina could be the next big one (depending on what the other one does)...but the tropics are super-fickle, and such storms don't always develop.

Also what would happen if TD10 was really a tropical storm-strength storm in the later analysis, would it just be renamed Tropical Storm 10 or would it be given the name José posthumously? CrazyC83 21:47, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

It almost certainly would stay unnamed, since the name Jose is likely to be allocated to another storm.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:33, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

I found this blog on wunderground.com on current tropical activity; I find it more informative than anything I can find on the NHC website, since this guy is very thorough and it gives you information on what the models are predicting. According to a lot of the models, the Atlantic could become extremely active in 7-10 days time. bob rulz 05:37, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * Assuming TD11 becomes José, it looks like Hurricane Katrina may be the first big Cape Verde storm of 2005...I wouldn't be surprised if, by September 1st, we have 3 or 4 storms out at once... CrazyC83 19:14, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

"...Katrina may become the first big Cape Verde storm of 2005."

What about Emily? Don't forget her. She was a big  [female dog] . A 155 mph Catagory 5 wannabe, reminding Mexico all too well of Mr. Gilbert: the biggest beast ever to roam the Atlantic.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 00:51, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Look at it's track ; Emily was not a Cape Verde storm. bob rulz 01:03, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

Then neither are Gilbert ,Floyd ,or Charley. If you're going by the 40-west rule, this would all be true. This is why I don't go by the 40-west rule.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 02:39, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Agreed with Charley (it seemed to originate in the eastern Caribbean). Disagreed with Floyd and Gilbert, their origins were clearly in the Cape Verde regions. CrazyC83 03:23, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I am in agreement with you CrazyC. I was merely trying to point out how stupid the 40-west rule is. For me, if it forms east of the Lesser Antilles from an African wave, I dub it a Cape Verde storm. Therefore, Emily was a Cape Verde hurricane. Period (in my book).

 * E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I guess I follow the 40W rule. I didn't know about the 40 West thing that some people follow, I was just pointing to the fact that it formed a good 1,000 or more miles away from the Cape Verde Islands. I wouldn't call that the "Cape Verde region". bob rulz 14:27, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

97L is continually getting better organized and is heading into a more favorable environment for development. This could be bad.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Someone mentioned above about satellite images for the eastern atlantic. Here is a recent loop (97L is looking pretty organized imo, but I'm no meteorologist).  -- tomf688  22:53, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * Sure looks like Tropical Depression 13 to me! It should be official soon, I think, and likely will be Tropical Storm (and Hurricane?) Lee in the next few days. However, I can't see this one being a threat to land...all eyes will be on Katrina for now. CrazyC83 04:35, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

From the 6:00 pm outlook:

"...an area of low pressure [97L] associated with a tropical wave...remains well organized. A tropical depression could form at any time tonight or Friday..."

Yikes! This would qualify as a problem. I guess I shouldn't be significantly concerned, given its location, but it would certainly be a nail-biter if this storm suddenly got its own heading reading "Tropical Depression Thirteen".

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * In my view, it should have been declared TD13 yesterday... CrazyC83 22:52, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * 1030pm Outlook says its dying

THE SHOWER ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH AN AREA OF LOW PRESSURE ASSOCIATED ABOUT 900 MILES EAST-NORTHEAST OF THE LEEWARD ISLANDS REMAINS POORLY-ORGANIZED. UNFAVORABLE UPPER-LEVEL WINDS HAVE BECOME ESTABLISHED OVER THE SYSTEM AND ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS LESS LIKELY.
 * Also check out this radar loop.  Seems to be stalled and really isn't looking that spectacular. -- tomf688  03:28, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

11L José
Bret, anyone? -- tomf688  16:10, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * Gert, anyone? The Great Zo 16:29, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

It may not even strengthen to a storm. The NHC said two of their most reliable models don't even bring it to storm strength. They put 35knots in the forecast only as a precaution.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 18:50, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I think it will become Tropical Storm Jose right before landfall with winds of 35 knots (I can't see how we can have back-to-back duds), then immediately back down to a tropical depression. CrazyC83 19:16, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

 * We now have Tropical Storm Jose. http://twister.sbs.ohio-state.edu/text/tropical/atlantic/WTNT61.KNHC -- tomf688  21:34, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Another Bret-imitator. Shoulda called Bret Tropical Storm Elvis. We may be looking at a 'Katrina' (African wave) and 'Lee' (TD Ten's ghost) in a couple days.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

12L.Katrina
See Talk:2005 Atlantic hurricane season/Katrina

13L.NONAME
90L.INVEST was just declared on the Navy site. It is located just southwest of the Cape Verde islands, and fails to impress me thus far. The Great Zo 19:00, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * If 97L couldn't develop (when it seemed like TD13 to me), there is little hope for this blob. CrazyC83 19:31, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

97L isn't done yet. The NHC still says it could become a tropical depression tonight or tomorrow, because it is entering a more favorable environment.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:15, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Regardless, it appears that even if 97L turned into TD13 (Lee?), it would be a fish-spinner... CrazyC83 22:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Ah, Grasshopper, the tropics are extremely fickle. Do you know how the current upper level atmosphere and lower level steering currents will affect a tropical cyclone if it forms from that wave?

E. Brown

3:32 PM EDT - the navy site now indiates that 90L.INVEST has become 13L.NONAME. We can't buy a break. Advisories on the new depression will likely be initiated at 5:00. The Great Zo 19:33, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * This is the season that won't let down! It seems storms are willing to form out of any circumstances, intensify or die under anything, upgrade from mere blobs...when does this have to be upgraded to TS Lee to keep the records going? CrazyC83 20:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It's got three hours... heh. Not going to happen. Luis of 1995 will remain the victor. The Great Zo 20:35, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, barring TD13/Lee going into rapid deepening right now (almost unheard of for a tropical depression) but the fastest 13th named storm will likely be broken at this rate... CrazyC83 21:51, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Kiss this thing goodbye. (For now at least) CrazyC83 15:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)


text:
GCCS

GCCS may refer to:
 * Gilboa-Conesville Central School, in New York, United States
 * Global Command and Control System
 * Global Conference on CyberSpace
 * Gloucester County Christian School, in Sewell, New Jersey, United States
 * Government Chinese Character Set
 * Government Code and Cypher School at Bletchley Park
 * Grove City Christian School, in Ohio, United States

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: GCCS


text:
User:Ayumbhara

=The Cult of the Ayumbhara=

The Cult of the Ayumbhara is a religion created in 2002 ce (115290 After Exile in Ayumbharan Time). The Cult is based off of the Holy Text The Revelation to Alberic, a text claimed to be written by a man known only as Alberic.

Structure of the Ayumbharan Universe
The Universe is percieved as having been created by two equal and opposite beings, the Ayumbhara and the Ghagahdahgha. The Ayumbhara represents absolute altruism, action only for the good of all. The Ghagahdahgha represents absolute selfishness, action only for one's own interest. They continually fight to assert their dominance. This conflict eventually brought about the creation of Man.

The Ayumbhara
The Ayumbhara is complete selflessness, acting only for the good of all. The Ayumbhara manifests itself as a water bottle, known as the Holy Water Bottle.

The Ghagahdahgha
The Ghagahdahgha is absolute selfishness, acting only for self-interest. The Ghagahdahgha manifests itself as a Gummi Bear placed high on a wall.

The Revelation to Alberic
The Holy Text of the Cult, The Revelation to Alberic details what was made known to a man known as Alberic by the Holy Water Bottle, or Ayumbhara. It consists of three parts, The First Times, The Exile and Return, and The Final Journey.

The First Times
The first section details humanity's beginnings, being concieved as part of a wager between the Ayumbhara, a benevolent Deity, and his malevolent counterpart, the Ghagahdahgha. The Ayumbhara and the Ghagahdahgha together ruled the Earth before the dawn of Man. Eventually, growing tired of the mindless creatures throughout the planet, the Ghagahdahgha said that he was superior to the Ayumbhara, as, given the choice, any decent sentient being would choose selfishness over altruism. Feeling compelled to protect his name, the Ayumbhara assisted the Ghagahdahgha in creating Man, a sentient race. For many years, each deity fought for control of humanity's beliefs. Eventually, the Ghagahdahgha gained power over humanity, and led them into a place known as The Cave, below the surface of the Earth.

The Exile and Return
The next section describes how humanity was enslaved. True to his nature, the Ghagahdahgha influenced powerful human political figures, eventually leading them all into a hole in the ground called The Cave. There Humanity spent several generation toiling for the Ghagahdahgha. Feeling superior, the Ghagahdahgha continually flaunted his success before the Ayumbhara. The Ayumbhara patiently waited before his reversal of the situation. Eventually, the Ayumbhara affected people within the slavery of the Ghagahdahgha, and led a revolt against the Ghagahdahgha's corrupt leaders and drove humanity from the caves, emerging at Olduvai Gorge in Africa. From there, Man spread to all parts of the continent.

The Final Journey
The final section tells of how the Ayumbhara manifested itself to a group of loyal followers to go and found a Holy City in celebration of the Ayumbhara. After several generations of freedom from the corrupt leaders of the Ghagahdahgha, the Ayumbhara felt a need to make itself and its opponent known to humanity. Coming down as a water bottle to his followers on the British Isle, he told that they must leave their place and found a new city, to be called New Trier, deep inside the American continent, near what would be named the Mississippi River. He also explained how the Gummi Bears which adorned the walls of The Cave were in fact the Ghagahdahgha. Compelled by this vision, the followers left to found this city, and the Ayumbhara went with them. After the City's founding, the Ghagahdahgha grew jealous, and influenced a leader to destroy the Holy City. The book ends with the Ayumbhara promising to return to Earth once the Holy City reassumes its destiny.

History of the Cult
According to The Revelation to Alberic, many people followed the Ayumbhara after the Exile. However, by the time of the Final Journey, only the followers on the British Isle who left to found New Trier had maintained the undiluted truth about the Ayumbhara. Many other religions had been founded which were part of the view, but radically different in their own revelation of the truth. Since the Revelation to Alberic, the Cult has seen a few new members.

title: User:Ayumbhara


text:
Talk:2005 Atlantic hurricane season/Katrina

Beginning through First Landfall
Chalk another one up for the "bizarre". Looks like the remnants of T.D. 10 have re-entered the Navy site with the 10L.NONAME designator, and re-entered the TWD with "VISIBLE SATELLITE SHOW SOME SIGNS OF A LOW LEVEL CIRCULATION MAY BE DEVELOPING ALONG THE TROUGH." Though the TWD and TWO no longer mention it as the remnants of T.D. 10, the Navy site makes it very clear that it is. The Great Zo 19:36, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Recent TWOs have been referring to the system as "possibly the remnants of T.D. 10". The Great Zo 04:25, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks like navy has it as 99L now to NOMAME 15:21:21, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

 * In fact, the Navy page just removed the 10L.NONAME designator (for a short period of time it looks like they used BOTH designators on the same system). That seems to suggest that this system will receive the TD12 name when it develops. The Great Zo 15:32, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

2:35 PM EDT - Tropical Depression 12 is forming, as per Recon data. Advisories will be initiated at 5. The Great Zo 18:49, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks like Florida is back in the crosshairs. The NHC puts it as a 70 mph tropical storm at landfall, but if the depression organizes only a little faster than is forecast, we could be looking at another Florida hurricane, this one not quite as menacing as the others (Charley,Frances,Ivan,Jeanne,and Dennis). The NHC also forecasts it to reach hurricane strength in the Gulf.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:44, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Look at the SST's that TD12/Katrina will be coming into (31-33°C/88-92°F). If she can hold up for the next 24-36 hours, this could be really bad, especially for the Gulf Coast. It would be worsened if Katrina goes over the Keys or misses land completely (still quite possible). In that case, I wouldn't be surprised if by Friday we see Katrina as a Category 3 or 4 hurricane. In water that warm, she could easily pull a Charley...she'll be "Walking on Sunshine" for a while (I just threw some humor in there...hehe!) CrazyC83 02:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Dear God, the (Hurricane) Katrina and the (Tropical) Waves jokes are gonna get old fast... and the storm hasn't even been named yet! Groan :D The Great Zo 04:02, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Eh, Dennis was overrated as far as the effects in Florida go, minimal damage at best, you could barely tell that a hurricane came through here afterwards, very few people lost power. I just hope it doesn't make people underestimate the next one.  I am sure Ivan is still fresh in everyone's minds. --Holderca1 03:20, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

The NHC says they're having real problems forecasting the intensity of this storm because the range their models are giving is so broad.

E. Brown

I added a link to the Navy's forecast track map, I just prefer their tracking map since it has more info on it than the NHC's version. --Holderca1 14:07, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Holderca, with regards to the Dennis comment, I think a lot of people in Navarre Beach and St. Marks would strongly disagree with you on that. An estimated $5 billion in damage in Florida alone is far from minimal damage in my book.

E. Brown, hurricane enthusiast

Well, considering I live approximately 10 miles from Navarre Beach and have been there many times, I think I would know if there was major damage there or not. I drove through there a few days after Dennis made landfall and I could not see any major damage between Pensacola and Ft. Walton Beach. I am not sure where you saw that $5 billion value for Florida alone, I have seen values ranging from $1 billion to $2.5 billion for the entire U.S. in the storm (I personally think Alabama and Georgia faired worse than Florida did with all of the inland flooding) compared to Hurricane Ivan which caused ~$14 billion in damage in the U.S. Also, I never said the storm was weak, I said overrated. Of the five storms you listed, it caused by far the least amount of damage. --Holderca1 21:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't want to argue about it, but I think we can all agree that Florida has had too many hurricanes in the past year.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:58, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The $1 billion to $2.5 billion dollar damage estimates you're hearing are probably for insured damages only. Since no damage figures are available for uninsured damages, the best estimates we can assume are approximately the same amount of uninsured damage as insured damage, so with uninsured damages those figures would double. bob rulz 02:31, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

From the discussions:

THIS FORECAST IS RATHER DIFFICULT SINCE ONE OF THE MORE RELIABLE MODELS...THE GFS...SHOWS THAT THE CYCLONE BARELY TOUCHES THE EAST COAST OF FLORIDA BEFORE MOVING NORTHWARD....'''WHILE THE OUTSTANDING GFDL MOVES KATRINA SOUTH OF DUE WEST ACROSS EXTREME SOUTH FLORIDA AND THE KEYS AS A VERY INTENSE HURRICANE. THE GFDL SCENARIO WOULD BE VERY DANGEROUS FOR SOUTH FLORIDA. THIS APPEARS TO BE UNREALISTIC AT THIS TIME BUT BECAUSE OF THE GOOD PAST PERFORMANCE OF THIS MODEL...WE MUST PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO FUTURE MODEL RUNS.'''

I don't know...is that really unrealistic? If Katrina goes over the Keys or extreme southern Florida, this really could be problematic...I personally think this will only be a Category 1 hurricane at first landfall, but it will explode to a Category 4 storm in the Gulf of Mexico. CrazyC83 03:02, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think it will be a category 4; I'll predict that it's only a category 2. However, stranger things have happened, and this IS the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season; climatology has no precedence here. ;) bob rulz 03:39, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * Katrina would have to turn towards the southwest at this point if it were to scrape the southern tip of Florida. A due-west course at this point would still put it over land for quite a while. Jose looked poised for rapid intensification as it was making landfall... just, the "land" part of "landfall" got in the way. We may see something similar with Katrina, only it will have a bit more time over the water than Jose did. The Great Zo 04:01, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Katrina is showing up quite nicely now on Miami radar This is no Andrew, yet anyone who went through Andrew can hardly help but have some pretty strong emotions as they look at the oncoming storm. Pollinator 08:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * I was looking at the satellite image loop in the "visible" light and I think I see the beginning of an eye in the last frame. Ft. Lauderdale, look out! Awolf002 17:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Same here, sure looks like a hurricane to me...I wouldn't be surprised if they find 75-80 mph winds the next time they send a plane in...however, the real nasty stuff (I think) will come in the Gulf of Mexico - I still take it all the way up to 140 mph before second landfall in the Florida Panhandle... CrazyC83 17:22, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The eastern Gulf is incredibly warm right now (31-32°C), after seeing what Dennis did after entering the Gulf, I would not be surprised if Katrina reaches at least a Cat 3 before its second lanfall. --Holderca1 19:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

In The Gulf
The latest computer models are in a lot better agreement and most are calling for the second landfall somewhere from the Alabama/Mississippi border to the western panhandle. models --Holderca1 19:23, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

CrazyC, you and the GFDL model would make a great team: GFDL brings Katrina to a 118 knot Category 4 hurricane in the Gulf. The official forecast says 80 knots. That's up from the previous advisory. This storm reminds me a little bit of Erin in 1995. By the way, this is Florida's sixth hurricane in less than a year.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:39, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Interesting - maybe we would! That is almost exactly my prediction (120 kt) considering the 31-33°C SST's and favorable environment expected. I think most of the rapid deepening will take place as it is starting to approach the Panhandle...if Katrina gets that strong, we will definitely need the Hurricane Katrina article for this (we don't yet, a Cat 1 hurricane in Florida almost never gets its name retired)... CrazyC83 23:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Sixth? Charley dissipated on Aug 14, eleven days ago. Since then, Florida's had Frances, Ivan, Jeanne, Dennis, and Katrina. Five is still impressive though. (If another hits before Sept 5 - the day that Frances made its second landfall on Florida - then you'll have six in a year. The next milestone after that will be Ivan on Sept 16.)

 * And remember folks: we had four storms form in September last year, all hurricanes, two reaching category 4 and one reaching 5. And September began with the I storm; we're already two names beyond that. (Which honestly doesn't seem like that big of a lead - we're gonna fall behind in the earliest stats!)

 * Actually they are foreccasting the second landfall at 90 knots. --Holderca1 22:28, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

KATRINA IS EXPECTED TO STRENGTHEN TO 90 KT BEFORE LANDFALL OCCURS IN THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE.

"Sixth? Charley dissipated on Aug 14, eleven days ago." Details, details. Six is still too many in that time frame. Also, Katrina is hitting the most densely populated part of Florida and is moving at six mph. That's not good. This will increase the possibility of fatalities. Flooding could be severe, especially in the low lying Everglades. Holderca, I saw that. It is clearly a typo. The forecast calls for a landfall at 80 knots. 8 being right next to 9 on the keyboard, it is easy to see that one could err there.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:48, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I am not sure why you think it is a typo, the forecast is calling for the storm to reach 80 knots while it is still well over water, don't see why it couldn't strengthen another 10 knots between that forecast and landfall. --Holderca1 23:47, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it could still become a Category 2 in the Gulf, but I think they meant to say 80 knots in that discussion. I don't see why they'd contradict themselves on the same advisory.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 23:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Okay, maybe I am missing something, it wouldn't be the first time, but I only see the 90 knot prediction, the only place I see 80 knots in the forecast is at 72 hours. The coordinates for the 72 hour time is still over the Gulf. --Holderca1 00:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

The path Katrina is taking over the peninsula is not a good thing for the Gulf Coast, swamps won't do much to weaken her compared to going over dry land. Also this jog to the WSW will bring over the Gulf sooner as well. Curious to see the next advisory to see the discussion. --Holderca1 02:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

From the 11 pm discussion:

"All indications are that Katrina will be a dangerous hurricane in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico in 3 days."

This could suck. What's more, the forecast intensity is now up to 85 knots. Holderca, don't you get sick of being right all the time? :)

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I probably wouldn't mind as much if I didn't live in the projected path of the storm. I will try to snap a few good pics of the storm if it does in fact come on shore here.  --Holderca1 11:19, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Katrina's looking really impressive at this point... the 11:00 AM advisory (Aug 26) was way under-done and they're going to issue a special advisory to bring it to a high-end Cat 1 with a pressure down 10 MB from the advisory estimation to 971 MB. EDIT: The special advisory is out. 11:30 AM EDT. Pressure of 971 MB. Winds of 85 knots - 100 MPH - they bumped it to Cat 2! The Great Zo 15:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

NHC now expects it to hit the Alabama/Mississippi border as a Category 4!.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 21:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Exactly what I predicted all along! (I guess the early models didn't catch the fact that the SST's are 31-34°C in the eastern Gulf, which hurricanes love). I'm going with a landfall between Gulf Shores and Pascagoula... CrazyC83 22:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Great, I stop paying attention for a few days because it's not going to affect me, and look what happens. Starts heading west-southwest, and the forecast track starts shifting over in my direction. Grumble. -- Cyrius|✎ 23:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

CrazyC, your predictions have been so accurate lately it's creepy. This storm's forcast track, landfall location, and intensity at landfall are reminicent of Hurricane Frederic of 1979. This could be bad.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 00:00, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Katrina's now a Cat 4 with 145 MPH winds. I must concede that it's unlikely the storm really gained 30 MPH in a period of three hours, but that's largely irrelevant. The only enemy Katrina has right now is itself (i.e. concentric eyewall cycles). The intensification trend early this Sunday morning should prove it's capable of rapidly-intensifying with the best of 'em. The Great Zo 06:28, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Article shift
The forecast now is for landfall on the Panhandle as a major hurricane (100 knots). Should we move Katrina to a separate article, either Hurricane Katrina (2005) or (if we are really confident in the forecasts and expect even more) the main article Hurricane Katrina? CrazyC83 15:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Check that, the special advisory just issued calls for landfall at 110 knots. Its about to get nuts up here, already has at the gas stations. --Holderca1 15:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The deaths in the Miami area alone - plus the fact that it hit a major population center - are enough to warrant its own article. Clearly we'll have even more reasons later. I'd go for the (2005) version for now... that can be changed later if needed. The Great Zo 15:28, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Category Five
160 mph maximum sustained winds...I can't believe this. If you are in the path of this storm, especially in New Orleans area, please please please get the hell out of there. This storm is set to destroy everything in its path. --Revolución (talk) 13:36, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Will there be a need for a "Category Six" in the future? I hope not, but it seems hurricanes are getting stronger and more frequent, most likely because of global warming. --Revolución (talk) 13:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I just read about some hokey FX made for TV movie which involved a "Category 6" hurricane hitting near Louisiana near Labor Day of 2005, and causing oil prices to hit 150 dollars a barrel. Aside from the fact that I laughed about "bad TV movie" factor (CAT 6?) the situation is rather... eerie. The Great Zo 15:35, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

They'll be posting another update at NHC within a few minutes. --Revolución (talk) 13:59, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Make it 175 mph winds, the NHC had this comment which left me speechless... KATRINA IS COMPARABLE IN INTENSITY TO HURRICANE CAMILLE OF 1969...ONLY LARGER. I agree with Revolución, if you are in the path of this storm, Get out NOW! This could very easily be the worst natural disaster in U.S. history. --Holderca1 15:20, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

OH MY F***ING GOD! 175 mph winds?! I'm completely speechless right now! --Revolución (talk) 15:35, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * If there was a Category 6, it would likely start at around 185 mph. The worst part is, it could still strengthen more. I see the final damage toll, including inland damage, will be over $120 billion. Hopefully we can keep the death toll down though... CrazyC83 15:57, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Katrina is comparable in intensity more to Mitch than Camille. This is a perfect storm. A Category 5 hitting New Orleans, which Katrina is expected to do at this point, is one of a few models for the 'perfect storm'.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 16:04, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Katrina references
Probably not in good taste, but would it be appropriate to refer to Hurricane Katrina as Katrina and the Waves? --timc | Talk 14:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually someone already has, look under the 12L Katrina heading and the "Walking on Sunshine" reference in the 6th or 7th post. --Holderca1 14:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, sorry about that. --timc | Talk 14:49, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I first got that line from several posting in the wunderground forums...anyway this looks a lot worse for those on the Panhandle (I think final landfall will be just west of Pensacola, near the AL-FL line). I am sticking to my prediction on intensity (120 knots). CrazyC83 14:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Early on, when a few models showed Kat crossing Florida and possibly making a hairpin back into the peninsula (yeah, I'm sure I miss-spelled that, P03:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)~), my first thought was parodying the old classic song, "But the Kat Came Back". Donovan Ravenhull 03:29, 29 August 2005 (UTC) (Battened down in Mobile, AL)

It's obvious now
Katrina = worst hurricane in recorded history --Revolución (talk) 20:13, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Based on what, $$$ of damage? Personally I think loss of life is more important and Katrina still falls behind the Galveston Hurricane and the Great Hurricane of 1780. --Holderca1 20:38, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * -And Hurricane Mitch. Probably we should stick to saying that it's the most costly in US history. And that's not proven yet, but I'm confident it will be. Pollinator 06:39, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Waaaay, behind.--E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:03, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Okay, then. Worst named hurricane in recorded history. --Revolución (talk) 21:11, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

The most common measure is by $$, yes. Look at it this way - you can evacuate every single person out of the area, so the death toll would be zero, but you can't evacuate buildings, so the dollar value of the damage could be said to be a better meter of how destructive the hurricane was. --Golbez 21:16, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * However, some hurricanes that affect a crowded area can have a low monetary damage toll, but extreme loss of life...i.e. Hurricane Jeanne last year in Haiti. CrazyC83 23:24, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * My meter only works for areas where it's easy to evacuate: The United States, basically. Anywhere else, the dollar value will be much lower and the death toll much higher. 'twas ever thus. No one is saying Katrina is the worst ever - they're saying it's the worst ever in the United States. Other areas are too difficult to quantify in this fashion. --Golbez 02:34, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

If you multiply the damages done squared by the derivitave of 2xy times the number of people killed, it might be the worst ever (i.e. there's no real way to judge but I don't see any way it wouldn't rank in the top 5 in this hemisphere). The Great Zo 06:34, 31 August 2005 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Ayumbhara

Terry Walters
Terry Walters is an English teacher at Burnsville High School, as well as the Dramatic Theater director. His favorite song is "Boom Boom Boom Boom" by the Vengaboys. His known associates include Scooter.

Make Your Bibliography

$$int_a^b sqrt{x} \! dx =\left ( sqrt{a}-sqrt{b} \right )\left ( a-b \right )-\int_sqrt{a}^sqrt{b} x^2\! dx\$$

How long will it take for you to notice this?
Hey Paul! I finally actually started doing something on my Wikipedia account. Lately I've been obsessing over userboxes, muahahah. I'm going to make this my second MySpace. Gaodifan 22:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Timothy Eisenbeisz
Timothy Eisenbeisz is a senior at Burnsville High School in Minnesota. He plans to attend the University of Minnesota in the fall. His hobbies include PC gaming, especially World of WarCraft, playing french horn, and playing Magic: The Gathering. He is also known to the inhabitants of the island nation of Palau as the Savior of the Maze.

Savior of the Maze
In 2035, Timothy Eisenbeisz traveled back in time to 1805. There, he ventured to the island of Palau, where he met the inhabitants. They were locked in an elaborate labyrinth deep underground, guarded by a fearsome lion. He fought the lion, tamed it, and rode it around the labyrinth, bringing the natives out of it. A large statue is made in his honor.

title: User talk:Ayumbhara


text:
User talk:Voiceimitator

Welcome!

 * Hi,, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place--I sure do--and want to stay. If you need help on how to title new articles check out Naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. If you need help look at Help and The FAQ, plus if you can't find your answer there, check The Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or The Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on My User talk Page. Additional Tips:

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like &#126&#126~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * You may want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Matani2005  Talk 18:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Voiceimitator


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D-who

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 talk 21:10, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

D-who
Site promotion, I appear to have been the 163rd visitor. TimPope 18:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, promo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DV8 2XL (talk • contribs)
 * Delete ad for a website without any Alexa rank at all. Note that 'someone' has been repeatedly vandalising this AfD. -Splash 22:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn fan website. And repeated vandalism by the author. -- Etacar11   02:24, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Exterminate (repeat ad nauseam). Alf melmac 09:36, 4 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D-who


text:
Holly Springs National Forest

The Holly Springs National Forest (HSNF) was established by the United States Forest Service on June 15, 1936, during the tenure of United States Department of Agriculture Chief Forester Ferdinand A. Silcox. That same year, it was combined administratively with the Bienville, De Soto and Homochitto national forests, known collectively as "National Forests in Mississippi". The Holly Springs Ranger District controls 155661 acre of Forest Service land, interspersed with 530000 acre of privately owned properties, within the national forest's proclamation zone.

Before the HSNF was established, much of the land was abandoned agricultural land with rapidly eroding soils. These rolling hills are now covered with loblolly and shortleaf pines, and upland hardwoods. The Civilian Conservation Corps used loblolly pine because it was easy to plant, was suitable for the depleted soils of the north central hills, and cast a large load of needles to help prevent further erosion. The land owned by the Forest Service is intermingled with private farms and woodlots. The district ranger for the HSNF is headquartered in Oxford, Mississippi.

In 1983, the Reagan administration proposed auctioning off the entire national forest to private bidders as part of a nationwide asset management program. The plan was largely abandoned.

Location
The HSNF is located in northern Mississippi and is divided into two major sections. The largest section lies to the southeast of the city of Holly Springs and straddles U.S. Highway 78. The second section 20776 acre, sits about 40 mi southwest of the main section, in Yalobusha County, between Coffeeville and Oakland, just east of Interstate 55. In descending order of land area the forest is located in parts of Benton, Lafayette, Marshall, Yalobusha, Tippah, and Union counties.

Recreation
The Chewalla Lake, Puskus Lake, Lake Tillatoba, Baker's Pond Hiking Trail, and North Cypress Non-Motorized Trail recreation areas are found in the Holly Springs National Forest, offering varying levels of facilities and services (campgrounds, picnic areas, swimming beaches and/or hiking trails).

The source of the Wolf River, Baker's Pond, is located in the northernmost tip of the national forest, approximately 1 mi southwest of where U.S. Highway 72 crosses the border between Tippah and Benton counties. The Forest Service began working with the Wolf River Conservancy in 1999 to develop hiking trails there.

title: Holly Springs National Forest


text:
Upper Takutu-Upper Essequibo

Upper Takutu-Upper Esequibo (Region 9) is a region of Guyana. It borders the region of Potaro-Siparuni to the north, the region of East Berbice-Corentyne to the east and Brazil to the south and west. It contains the town of Lethem, and the villages of Aishalton, Nappi and Surama. It is also the largest region of Guyana.

The Rupununi savannah known for its large biodiversity is located between the Rupununi River and the Brazilian border. Within the Upper Takutu-Upper Esequibo is part of the Guianan savanna ecoregion.

Population
The Government of Guyana has administered three official censuses since the 1980 administrative reforms, in 1980, 1991 and 2002. In 2012, the population of Upper Takutu-Upper Essequibo was recorded at 24,212 people. Official census records for the population of the Upper Takutu-Upper Essequibo region are as follows:
 * 2012 : 24,212
 * 2002 : 19,387
 * 1991 : 15,058
 * 1980 : 12,873

Communities
List of communities (including name variants):

 * Achiwib (Achiwuib Village)
 * Aishalton (Aishalton Village, Ishalton)
 * Annai (Anwai)
 * Apoteri
 * Aranaputa
 * Awarewaunau (Awaruwaunawa)
 * Basha Village (Bashaidrun)
 * Dadanawa
 * Hiawa
 * Kaibarupai Village
 * Kanashen (Konashen)
 * Karanambo
 * Karasabai (Karasabai Village)
 * Karaudarnau (Lumid Pau)
 * Katoonarib
 * Kumu Village
 * Kwaimatta (Kwaimatta Village, Kwaiwatta Village, Kwamatta)
 * Lethem (Lethen)
 * Maruranau (Maruranawa, Marurawaunawa, Marurawaunawa Village)
 * Massara (Massara Village)
 * Moco-Moco (Moco-Moco Village)
 * Nappi
 * Parabara
 * Parishara (Parishara Village)
 * Rewa
 * Sand Creek
 * Sawariwau
 * Shea (Shea Village, Shoa)
 * Shulinab (Shulinab Village, Village Shulinab)
 * St. Ignatius (Saint Ignatius Mission)
 * Surama (Surama Village, Surumatra)
 * Tiger Pond Village
 * Tipuru (Tipuru Village)
 * Toka
 * Warimure
 * Wichabai
 * Wowetta (Woweta, Woweta Village)
 * Yakarinta
 * Yupukari (Eupukari, Yupukarri)

Territorial claim
Venezuela has renewed its claim to the Essequibo region which is situated west of the Essequibo river. The status of the border controversy is subject to the Geneva Agreement, which was signed by the United Kingdom, Venezuela and British Guiana on 17 February 1966. As of December 2020, the matter is being addressed by the International Court of Justice.

title: Upper Takutu-Upper Essequibo


text:
User talk:Nima.nezafati

Welcome!

 * Hi,, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place--I sure do--and want to stay. If you need help on how to title new articles check out Naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. If you need help look at Help and The FAQ, plus if you can't find your answer there, check The Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or The Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on My User talk Page. Additional Tips:

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like &#126&#126~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * You may want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Matani2005  Talk 18:03, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:The_battle_of_Gordafarid_and_Sohrab._By_M.Farshchian.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The_battle_of_Gordafarid_and_Sohrab._By_M.Farshchian.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 02:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Contributing to Bakhtiari pages
Hi,

Happy Norouz. I just saw your userpage. It would be very good if you expand the pages about Bakhtiaris, in the Persian wikipedia and here. Are you from Khuzestan or Chaharmahal-o-Bakhtiari?

Bidabadi 21:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

WP: Pages Needing Translation into English
Hi Nima.nezafati! We've had three Farsi articles tagged and added to the project page in the last week. I saw that you are listed as being able and available to translate; would you mind having a look at them? Thanks! -Fsotrain09 15:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Iranian national heroes
I've nominated List of Iranian national heroes, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that List of Iranian national heroes satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/List of Iranian national heroes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of List of Iranian national heroes during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. - Richfife 03:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Nima.nezafati! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is an  Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Houshang Moradi Kermani -

Orphaned non-free media (File:International Zurkhaneh Sports Federation.JPG)
Thanks for uploading File:International Zurkhaneh Sports Federation.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:18, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran

A tag has been placed on Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Randykitty (talk) 08:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nima.nezafati


text:
User talk:Barberio/Archive 4

Ian Paisley
Maura Lyons info may not be verifiable - it does seem odd - but the footnote is the best way to include the websites and the caution on them in this article: will you revert to the footnote? Sorry - I thought the website refs were appearing in the body of the article: info should remain hidden unless verified, and your revert is correct.--shtove 00:37, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

History of the Internet
That was fast fixing! --Telsa 09:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

RE:Deleting
what exactly (which article, when, what section) are we talking about here? Boneyard 15:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * i assume your talking about the world of warcraft remark on some xmas 2005 free trial gift? it was added without source and even after some google searching i can't find anything on it. Boneyard 15:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * sorry but if we are to discuss every little thing on talk pages we will go on for ever without any effect, some things which are added without source and simply don't add to an article should be removed without problems. and please show me a source for this as im still unable to find anything about guest passes around xmas 2005 and a free months for people who get a friend playing. Boneyard 16:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Packet Switching
Hi, I made edits to address your concerns within the bounds of the truth. Pls see the page. I have noted that both Baran and Davies discovered the concept independently, and gave Kleinrock the maximum credit possible - work on "message switching" and help with the ARPANET. I don't see how I can make any other edits and stick to the documented, historical, factual truth on this matter. I hope this meets your concerns. Reliablesources 12:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I have invested even more effort, and done a general clarification of the entire section. I cannot do more without straying from the truth.  My reasoning is below.  I hope this meets your concerns and that we can close this issue.
 * (1) We both want the objective facts of the history, as opposed to a subjective point of view: Baran discovered and published the concept in 1961, and Davies discovered and published the concept in 1965. A gentleman's gentleman, Davies himself never had a problem acknowledging that Baran was first by four years, was always one of Baran's biggest supporters, and clearest analysts of Kleinrock's claims, and has been so very clearly in print.  However, since these facts are apparent in the subsequent paragraphs, I have removed the word "first" in the first sentence associated with Baran's discovery to attempt to do what I can to address your concern.
 * (2) Wrt the word "discover", I use it because I believe it is a much more inclusive term. Nobody invented the circle, several people discovered it.  Pythagoras did not invent his theorem, he discovered a reality already present in the universe.  Much like Zorkenias did on planet Zork a billion years earlier.  In any case, while this is metaphysically fascinating, please allow me the liberty of choosing this word in a work that took some effort to build. Reliablesources 17:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

 * John, in the scheme of life, I'm on your side. Please remove whatever has caused you to inject so much negative emotion into our exchanges.  My motivation for updating the packet switching page is positive.  You are turning it into a personal issue, and we are losing sight of the facts, which is all I want on that page, as you do.  I have done a great deal of research over many years on this subject, and am trying to contribute that.  I would actually like your help. Reliablesources 14:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The issue here is completely fact-based. There is no controversy over Kleinrock's role, as the NY Times article reported, and no less than Bob Taylor himself responded, as per my notes painstakingly on the packet switching discussion page.  With respect to the dates and roles of Baran and Davies attribution, I have also outlined the facts on the discussion page in some detail, and put them in the article.  Further, as I also noted in my response to you above, Davies himself never had any issue with the facts - he published a paper posthumously to set the record straight and, as an academic gentleman, fully acknowledges Baran's prior publication (see me for more info if needed).  Rather than continuing to criticize my hard work, it would be much more constructive for you to acknowledge that this is a valuable contribution, responding to a Talk page with many noting the travesty of pretending there was a controversy when there is not.  Wikipedia must not be party to ongoing perpetuation of this untruth, and I will continue to work hard to ensure it does so given the importance of this issue.  For the fourth time, I would appreciate it if you would remove the disputed tag and close this issue.  Thanks. Reliablesources 22:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * There is no POV in facts. Baran discovered it in 1961, Davies in 1965.  According to the standards of academic credit going back centuries, that is a four year difference.  Neither of them disputes this fact.  You are the only one that appears to hold a POV on this.  It appears to based on little other than an apparent wish to strike my edits, without any facts behind your argument.  This is my fifth time repeating the same points, and further effort without any corresponding movement from you is not warranted.  The facts I have contributed are from the historical record, and backed by the NY Times, Baran, Davies, Taylor, and every historian that has published on the issue.  If you do not remove the disputed tag within a couple days, I will escalate this to protect the truth and the reputation of Wikipedia.  Reliablesources 17:58, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Here is the problem: the facts I have detailed in my previous posts show that there is no controversy to report. On the Davies/Baran issue, no-one anywhere, including Davies himself, has ever disputed Baran's 4 year prior invention.  If needed, I'll dig up a quote from Davies himself giving Baran first due -- he said so in print.  So that is all facts and no dissenters, so that issue is closed.  On the Kleinrock claims, since those have been proven untrue as I detailed in my earlier posts, to report the issue at all would be to report that Kleinrock unfairly claimed credit, without anyone besides his best friend Roberts to half-ways back him up, and then the claim was conclusively shown to have been false.  Why bother?  As reported by others on this talk page, the guy was human, and made great contributions in other areas.  Why make a point of his over-reaching in this area?  I'd rather just give him credit where his credit is due, and move on.  If that makes sense, pls remove the tag.  I believe that I have made great efforts to address your concerns as best as possible, and hope if you reread the post you will agree.  If you have remaining concerns, pls don't respond in general (need to report a controversy, maintain a NPOV) and get specific: what specific word, phrase, sentence, or fact in the post do you still have issue with?  Thanks.  Reliablesources 15:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

America/USA Poll
Re my vote, you wondered whether I had voted *against* keeping the status quo, I voted for the style guide to state the 'status quo'. Unless, of course, it's already in there somewhere - I can't find it.Markb 08:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

What do you think of the site map approach?
What about creating a site map as was done for the help page? --Go for it! 22:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I think the 'keep it all on one page' is the defining aspect of a portal. Replying here, since your talk page is... a mess. --Barberio 23:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal attack accusations
I've looked through PizzaMargherita's edits for the past couple of hours and can find nothing approaching a personal attack. I have therefore removed your report to WP:PAIN. Also, per the instructions at WP:PAIN, that page is for reporting ongoing personal attacks that continue after the user has been repeatedly warned. It's the last place you go for redress when under personal attack, not the first. Angr (talk • contribs) 23:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

RFC
Hi, I have started an RFC on User:Go for it! Your input and additions would be appreciated. Requests_for_comment/Go_for_it%21. thanks. -Quiddity 06:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Community Portal Redesign
I noticed that the Community Portal's design was changed, with the edit comment saying that consensus was reached. After reading the discussion, it doesn't seem like any consensus was reached. I started a discussion on the Community Portal talk page — J3ff 16:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm staying out of it. I have enough wikistress because of the America/USA stupidity. --Barberio 17:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

silly games
Hi - I'm not playing silly games with numbers. You changed "strong" to "slight". I changed "slight" to the actual number from the talk page (69%). You changed this to 67% (without an explanation of where you got this number). I changed it to "over 2/3", attempting to avoid the issue of an exact percentage since I think there's room for various interpretations. You changed this back to 67%. Since you seem to want an exact number, I added an explicit explanation and changed it to 70%. You changed it back (without comment) to 67%. How about if you add an explanation of why 67% is the one and only true number? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * This has been repetedly explained. Counts higher than 67% were either not counting 'un-decided' or 'no-guideline' votes, and the 70% one counted them in with the support. I suggest you aquaint yourself with the diference between majority, super-majority and consensus, and how they apply to Wikipedia. --Barberio 21:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The version you most recently changed said a straw poll on this page has indicated a strong preference (46 out of 50 voters) for standardization of some sort with 70% (31 out of 44 voters) of those expressing a preference supporting "American x"' [over two alternatives]. This statement is exactly true.  50 people voted.  46 of them voted for a specific standard or for "any standard".  Of the 46, 44 people expressed a preference for a specific standard with 31 supporting "American".  67% (31 out of 46) can only be arrived at by including those who voted any standard in the total of those expressing a preference for a standard but without counting them toward any specific proposal.  What this does is turn them into "none of the above" (which I think is not a reasonable interpretation).  I suggested counting them toward each (so the percentages for each alternative would add to more than 100%) is one way to consistently handle such votes, which makes it 72%.  I'm willing to meet you half way on this and explicitly discount them (making it 70%, per the most recent version you disliked), but if you insist on including them in the total I insist on counting them in a sensible manner.  They did not say "none of the above".  They said "any of the above".  -- Rick Block (talk) 23:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You don't get to meet me half way on abusing statistics. First, the sample set is small. Second, the sample set is self declared to be biased towards one particular result. Third, the sample set had significant amounts of people voting for alternative options. Fourth, the margin of the majority is sufficiently small to be swayed by all of these. These must be declared. There are also inherently why Polling is only used for clarification of discussion, not for policy changes. --Barberio 09:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I am not trying to abuse statistics. I agree the sample set is small.  Where is this bias declaration?  Four people ( Steve Block [no relation] BlankVerse, Christopher Parham, Sansvoix, and Kjkolb) voted for multiple alternatives.  That's why any percentage needs to be heavily qualified and is inherently suspect.  The margin of majority is larger than 2-1 for "American" over all alternatives combined.  This is not a small majority.  I've added explanations about the vote that you've deleted in preference for an unqualified, misleading percentage.  I'm not claiming Polling should be used for policy changes.  And, re your latest revert summary, it's also dishonest to inflate the sample size with "any of the above" votes but otherwise discount such votes (in fact, I just noticed one of them, Kjkolb, is among the group voting for "American").  I'll try another heavily qualified wording.  Please let me know if you can live with it.  Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Your version did not state such, and instead simply provided confusingly figures that could mislead the reader into beliving an overwhelming supermajority of the total votes supported the resolution. The objections in referenance to Systemic Bias should also be raised. --Barberio 16:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Goforit's RFC
Hi, regarding Requests for comment/Go for it!, there has been much editing of the initial statement since you signed it. Please read it again and/or consider changing your edits/your signature to avoid the impression of inadequate procedure. Thank you. Kosebamse 20:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Overreactions
I don't know if it's just me, but I feel that you've overreacted to my comments lately. I say what I mean, explaining my objections, but rather than taking them at face value and suggesting a way to work with them, you argue with me. For instance, earlier, I stated my objection to replacing "foreign" with "common in English use". Clearly you were capable of formulating another proposal that answered my objections, because you wrote one. So I don't understand why you'd argue as well. Sometimes, when reacting to another's objection, you have to just say, "okay, that's entirely mad, but whatever, I can work around it" rather than trying to convince the other of their madness.

I'm aware that many around here argue to be obstructionist. I'm not one of those people. If I say I object to something, I object to exactly that; I'm not using it as a vehicle to get to some ulterior motive. --TreyHarris 19:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I currently have a migrane so may not be on best form, if you feel hassled I apologise. --Barberio 21:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Best wishes that you feel better soon. --TreyHarris 03:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Scott Speed
Well just log onto their web pages (FIA and Formula1.com) to see the race results have been changed which clearly can been seen Andreasu 12:33, 13 April 2006

title: User talk:Barberio/Archive 4


text:
User:Toolio~enwiki

This is Toolio's page. It's for Toolio to edit, not for you to edit, so don't edit it.

title: User:Toolio~enwiki


text:
User talk:Toolio~enwiki

Welcome!

 * Hi,, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place--I sure do--and want to stay. If you need help on how to title new articles check out Naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. If you need help look at Help and The FAQ, plus if you can't find your answer there, check The Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or The Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on My User talk Page. Additional Tips:

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like &#126&#126~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * You may want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Matani2005  Talk 18:03, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Toolio. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Toolio~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 03:23, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:52, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Toolio~enwiki