User talk:Mitchazenia/Archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive3
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Re: Buttons

Not sure what you mean by making buttons for the articles. I might help if you elaborate. Hurricanehink 01:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Some buttons to link to each article i write. The table of contents is gigantic.HurricaneCraze32 01:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Your old talk page

It was full of potential articles, which should really be in subpages of your userpage. The link at the top of this page will link there. NSLE (T+C) 01:22, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks but can you make a button set for them?hurricanehink hasnt said if he'd do it.HurricaneCraze32 01:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Categorizing your pages

Hurricane, User pages should not be in categories. Please remove all category listing from your pages except for Wikipedia:User categories which can remain. If you have any questions, I can help. -- Samuel Wantman 08:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I am totally confused.HurricaneCraze32 23:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

TD 14 pic

Here is a picture of it while over Cuba, while this picture shows the depression while south of Jamaica. They come from the website located here, which has worldwide satellite imagery for every 3 hours, every day, back to 1983, give or take a few locations on a few days. Hurricanehink 20:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.The Article i wrote myself its in LNBS Hurricanes.HurricaneCraze32 21:51, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

First, the naming list is pretty good. Some names are a little out there (like Cossack or Manley), but overall they aren't bad. Unfortunately, a few of those names are in use already. Nana and Valerie are used in the Atlantic, while Patricia is used in the Eastern Pacific. Overall, I like the list. Here is what I would do for a replacement list.

  • Amanda
  • Brian
  • Claudia
  • Diego
  • Esther
  • Forrest
  • Gail
  • Harold
  • Irma
  • Jeff
  • Kirstin
  • Leonardo
  • Mary
  • Neville
  • Oswald
  • Pedro
  • Rhonda
  • Scott
  • Terry
  • Vaughn
  • Whitney

You can probably add TD 14 into the 1987 article. Just be sure to proofread it, as your version has some mistakes. See you later. Hurricanehink 01:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

One more thing. You can't exactly vote for a merging of an article like Kyle, simply because it is in the LNSH. That is coming along nicely, though. Hurricanehink 01:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes but stealing storms that arleady have a subpage seems a little nuts an stealing.Thanks for the compliment.And i've added 14 but its missing a button.And 3 replacements to that:
  • Victoria
  • Natrone
  • Peralina

I feel like publishing the LNSB-i can add more as i go on.Dont know what else to do.HurricaneCraze32 02:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

First, I hardly consider making an article that you coincidentally had on your list stealing. Most people don't even know of it. Second, interesting names you chose. Victoria is nice, but what is Natrone or Peralina? Third, what would you publish the LNSB as? No offense, but the seasonal articles from which those storm come from hold much of the information there. In addition, what is the connection between the storms? It seems they are either fish storms, or landfalling tropical cyclones that cause little damage. You can't really make a list of fish storms or every landfalling tropical cyclone, simply because there's too many that you left out. I would advise against publishing it. Have fun with the list, though. Hurricanehink 02:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I have a better idea.Why dont link the 22 chosen storms to where the link is currently.HurricaneCraze32 15:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Mainly because the LNSB is only a little more in detail than the storm summaries. You should ask someone else for their opinion though, like Hurricane Eric. He typically knows what to do. Hurricanehink 15:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Anyone but Eric.He hates me enough.HurricaneCraze32 16:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Whoops, sorry to hear that. Maybe Rattleman or Jdorje? Maybe an admin, like NSLE or Golbez? I personally don't think they should be linked, but that's just me. My reasoning is 1) that they link to a user subpage, and 2) they are lesser notable for a reason. You tell me, why should there be a link to Erika, when much of that information is on the seasonal article? Hurricanehink 16:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe CrazyC83-helped me with my ToC disaster.

Thats the point.22 lesser notable but strong storms. Its to save up making to many supages- and they maybe fish-spinners but they were intresting ones.HurricaneCraze32 17:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

But there's no need to make pages for all of the storm. If they were interesting, feel free to add more information to the seasonal article, and show how they were interesting. Fish storms generally don't get their own article, due to lack of information, but anything you have on your list should be on the main article, especially if you have information that isn't there. Hurricanehink 17:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll bring up one that wasn't there,That i wrote myself,TD14.HurricaneCraze32 17:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it was there, but your section had more detail. In case you didn't know, I did a complete rewrite for the 1987 season; more detail, grammar check, the works. If I deleted something you wanted in there, you can add it back in, but be sure to check your grammar and spacing when you write. What you did was fine though. If you think your section is better, feel free to add that information to the storm section. Hurricanehink 17:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that and since you did it.Can you add 14 to 1987's button bar and make a button bar for LNSB? I'm readding some stuff.HurricaneCraze32 17:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
I added 14 to the 1987 button bar. I'll make a button bar for the LNSB, as long as you promise not to put it outside of talk pages. Hurricanehink 17:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Enjoy! Hurricanehink 18:06, 29 January 2006 (UTC) Template:HurricaneCraze32/Directing Buttons

Thanks so much.Can i change the title to Lessenr Notable But Strong Hurricanes? And its linking to the season pages.HurricaneCraze32 18:36, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
No problem. I wasn't sure where you wanted it to link to. You can edit it here. Hurricanehink 19:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Can you do it-i messed it up.HurricaneCraze32 19:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Fixed everything. Enjoy. Hurricanehink 20:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks.HurricaneCraze32 23:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Templates

When adding a new template, please don't misname it. It should be {{1968 Atlantic hurricane season buttons}}. Adding in a / is simply wrong. Also, please add {{hurricane|class=Template}} to the talk pages of any hurricane-related templates. — jdorje (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello. My name is Polka Dottie and heres my friends and parents. [1] by the way whats a template?E-Series 16:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hard to explain.Its where certain things are placed.They can be edited and put up anywhere.HurricaneCraze32 19:58, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Sorry to bug you

I'm not how that could work. Sorry, but I'm really bad with computer stuff. Everything I do, regarding HTML or computer link things, is based on copy and pasting and trial and error. You would have to make a new infobox hurricane template, and change the storm colors that appear there. I'm not the person to ask, but given its complexity you might want to leave it be (unless you know someone else who's good with that). Hurricanehink 22:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the modesty, unfortunately:

1.I am not understanding that at all.

2.Do you know anyone?

HurricaneCraze32 22:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


Happy Birthday!

Happy 15th Birthday! Mine has already passed. It was February 22. Icelandic Hurricane #12 14:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks man.I'm not exactly 15 for another 2:58 but ok.HurricaneCraze32 14:39, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Happy Birthday! If only there was a hurricane could form today ;) Have a great one! Hurricanehink 14:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Intesting cake,hink, thanks though.HurricaneCraze32 14:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Sure thing :) Hurricanehink 14:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Can you help me with my Bob article of the LNSB-It fits the category (At least 100M dollars.520 actually.)HurricaneCraze32 14:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
??? I'm not sure what the category is, but Bob only caused $54.7 million in damage. Hurricanehink 15:34, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
I read 520 Million somewhere.HurricaneCraze32 15:42, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, not sure. I tried googling Hurricane Bob 520 million, and the first site that came up was this page :) Hurricanehink 15:48, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Odd.I dont remember where i found the info.HurricaneCraze32 18:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Question though. What was the category that Bob fit in to? Hurricanehink 18:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
1979-Category 1.HurricaneCraze32 18:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, OK. Hurricanehink 19:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Bob-1985 did nothing.Bob was retired in 1991 so-its the only other one.HurricaneCraze32 19:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, 1985's Bob did hit South Carolina as a hurricane. I wouldn't call that nothing. Hurricanehink 19:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
'79's was more notable than '85.HurricaneCraze32 20:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
True, but 85 wasn't a nothing storm either. Hurricanehink 20:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll give you that one.Excepting the damage-how else does it look?HurricaneCraze32 22:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
It's adequate. There's too much impact in the storm history, and writing is iffy in areas. I dunno. Hurricanehink 22:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Can you give me 2 suggestive paragraphs?HurricaneCraze32 19:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. The storm history should be two paragraphs of history only. Typically I break the first paragraph into the development of the storm, then the progress to the peak of the storm, then landfall to dissipation. The intro should have meteorological stats (rainfall totals, wind peaks, storm surge, tornadoes) in 1 paragraph, then damage info in another paragraph. Retrospectively, the storm might not be notable enough to have its own article, but it is appropriate where it is. Hurricanehink 21:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)


TD 14

14 south of Jamaica
14 south of Jamaica
14 south of Cuba
14 south of Cuba

I noticed you made a special article for Tropical Depression 14 (1987), but there's no infobox picture. I don't like that, so I did you the favor of adding pics of Td 14. The one on the left is while it is south of Jamaica at peak strength, and the one on the right is it while south of Cuba without much convection. Enjoy! Hurricanehink 19:22, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.I have 2 others-Marco (1990) and Bob (1979).I've chosen the 4 most notable storms there and made them articles-i have 1 left to do (Danny-1985).HurricaneCraze32 19:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Cool, good job. Hurricanehink 19:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I tweaked 14's Storm History-i figured out the "elliptical 200 millibars" meant.Anything else i should change?HurricaneCraze32 19:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
You should add more impact, if possible. Rainfall totals in Florida and info in Jamaica should be there. Hurricanehink 19:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok. Marco and Bob?HurricaneCraze32 19:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, 14 still needs a lot more. I'm not sure about Marco, because much of what Marco did is covered in the Klaus article. Bob needs more impact, above all. You say someone was killed in Puerto Rico. If anyone ever dies from a hurricane, you should give detail to the location to where they died. In this case, how could Bob, a Gulf of Mexico storm, cause a death in Puerto Rico. The storm history should only be storm history. Meteorological statistics, like tornadoes, damage, and rainfall, should be in the impact section. With a good bit of work, 14 and Bob could possibly become real articles eventually. They both need a lot of work, though, all around. Hurricanehink 19:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Can you find a picture of Bob?The reason the pic wasnt up earlier for 14 was cause the first 2 you gave it to me are busted.HurricaneCraze32 19:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Nah, I can't find any. Hurricanehink 19:58, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for not getting mad at me for making these-i was awfully nervous about making these.Look at the pic i found-its on the article.HurricaneCraze32 20:00, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
If you're going to publish them as real articles, then you shouldn't have the LNBS thing on the front. Just Hurricane Bob (1979) is fine. However, you should work on them a lot more if you wish to publish them. No offense, but there are parts across all 3 articles that are practically illegible. In Bob's, for example, what do you mean when you say, "1 person's death area"? Again, the storm history is only for the storm's formation, storm path, and dissipation. Flooding, trivia, warnings, and tornadoes should all go elsewhere. Here's an easy formula I like to use.
  • Intro- 3-4 sentences minimum
  • Storm history- 2 paragraphs minimum; first can be formation, second can be landfall and dissipation. Each paragraph should be at least 6 lines.
  • Preparations- This is optional for lesser hurricanes. A few sentences is fine, describing warnings and evacuations.
  • Impact- This should be equal or greater in length to the storm history, and most of the research for the hurricane should be devoted to this area. When possible, if the system impacted more than one area, separate the impact section by area. Bob, for example, could be separated into Louisiana (or Gulf Coast) and Mid-West (or Indiana). There, it should have at least 2 paragraphs each. The first paragraph should be meteorological statistics; rainfall totals, peak wind gusts, storm surge, tornadoes (if any), and beach erosion (if any). The second paragraph should describe property damage. When known, include the number of houses destroyed or people left homeless by the storm. Detail is very good. You want to prove people here that the storm deserves to have an article. The storm history can be condensed as much as you want, and should not be a factor in an article's quality. You need impact, and plenty of it.
Finally, nice pic for the Bob article, but where did you find it? First, if you don't have an address for it, it will be deleted in 1 week. Second, it needs to be public domain. If you got it from a .com website, there's a good chance you can't use it. I hope you read my comments and consider them. You have good starts for those articles, but they simply aren't ready to be published articles, mainly due to lack of quality. I mean no offense, but you should proof-read your writing more. In some of the articles, the writing makes no sense. Try and work on Bob and 14 the most, mainly because Marco will likely not last as a Wikipedia article due to Klaus. I think Bob has more potential, but both could eventually become articles. When writing an article, you need more than one source, and you need to spend more than 10 minutes working on something before you publish it. Try and find some more than what is in the seasonal article, and good luck. Hurricanehink 20:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

1)Marco i worked all yesterday on.

2)I found it at the NHC-saved the picture on my computer and uploaded it from the computer.

3)I think tornadoes fit in story.HurricaneCraze32 20:24, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

1) Marco still needs work, sorry.
2) Do you have a link to the picture? The one you gave was incorrect and linked to 1991's Bob.
3) Tornadoes are fine, but they are part of the impact, not part of the storm history, especially since there were only 8 tornadoes.
Finally, do you plan on adding to Bob significantly? It is much too short, in my opinion, to warrent it being kept. Hurricanehink 20:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
What else can I fix on 14? I've run out of impact stuff.I think its almost ready.HurricaneCraze32 21:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
For starters a complete rewrite would be nice. I'm sorry, but some parts make no sense for an encyclopedia. In the intro, you say it's the most notable tropical depression of the season. That doesn't take much. A better intro might be, "Tropical Depression Fourteen was a weak tropical cyclone that caused significant rainfall from the Caribbean Sea through Florida. The final tropical depression of the 1987 Atlantic hurricane season, the system caused six deaths in Jamaica." or something like that. You need to write the storm history in your own words. It cannot use any meteorological terms that the layman won't understand, like the elliptical high or all of the wind information in Florida. You cannot call it Tropical Wave 14 because, in all likelihood, there were more tropical waves before it. The wording is poor throughout, including, for example, saying "To say the least 14 has to be one of the most deadly depressions ever." Unless you have a link to back that up with years of data, you can't put it in. You could mention that a depression causing 6 deaths is unusual, but you would have to find a link for it. What does it mean when you say the temperature dropped in the storm history? You can reiterate the turbulance of the storm, but not the way you put it. How could the storm spawn tropical storm warnings? Officials put up the watches and warnings, not the storm. The order of everything makes little sense throughout the article. You cannot claim the storm had tropical storm characteristics. If anything, you could say it potentially reached tropical storm status, but you have to make more sense of the data. Never, I repeat, never copy and paste anything, especially if it's from the tropical cyclone report. Replacing advanced words with more common words never works. Simply rewrite and summarize the information given. Never mention the time of day, especially 006Z. You could say in the morning or something instead. How can you call a depression him, as you did in the report oddities section? It didn't even receive a name! In the trivia section, it doesn't take much to make a depression the most notable, especially since notable is subjective. In addition, you don't know how strong the other depressions were. They could have easily been 35 mph. How do you know that it would be the last time since 1990 to have 14 depressions? They also got there in 1989, per this NHC link, and 2 years since getting 14 depressions isn't that useful. Another thing you should never do is use the first person. How can we get to 14 depressions? The season did, but you, nor anyone else, got the season to 14 depressions. How is Lili relavent to a TD 14 article? OK, I got that out of my system. Please respond to each question here. This is very important for your article writing. Hurricanehink 21:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I am not gonna answer every question-i'm trying to do this one piece at a time.HurricaneCraze32 22:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Just checking. Hurricanehink 02:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
What else must I fix?

Changes:

1)Reworded temprature sentence."The outside air tempurature dropped from 24 to 19 degrees Celsius within 8 minutes due to a strong updraft from 14."

2)"A depression causing 6 deaths is highly unusual and unlikely. Depressions that compare to it are like Subtropical Depression 22 (2005) & Tropical Depression 11 (1999)." added.

3)"Later on November 3rd at 1746Z, a NOAA Aircraft suffered severe turbulence as it traveled through one of 14's feeder bands." worded better.

4)Now four paragraphs long in Storm History

5)"The low in conjunction with the western end of an elliptical 200 milibars high to the east, caused a shearing pattern that dissipated 14." reworded

6)"All the readings assure that 14 had tropical storm characteristics." changed from state.

7)"Of all of depressions in 1987, 14 was the most notable. This would be the last time till 1989 that we got to 14 depressions." That's the new trivia. HurricaneCraze32 12:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

1) But what does that mean? Also, is it even needed to be mentioned? The previous sentence mentions the turbulence, so you don't need another sentence about that when the article should be about the storm.

2) First, strangest is in a point of view, and second, how does it compare to those depressions? This article is about TD 14, not about those storms. The mention of those depressions should be removed.

3) That's good. You just need better transition between sections and sentences.

4) You just added more spacing. You can combine the first two paragraphs and the last two paragraphs so there's not so much white space.

5) That still doesn't make much sense with the elliptical stuff. Why can't you say, "Due to the presence of a strong high pressure system to its east, the depression entered an area of strong wind shear and weakened". Note: it didn't dissipate. The Tropical cyclone report indicates it remained a tropical depression throughout its lifetime.;

6) Oddities is a point of view. The section title could be Possibility for Tropical Storm Status, or something like that. The sentences there need better flow, though.

7) How is 2 years since having 14 depressions important. That should be removed. The trivia section should be removed IMO. There's no real need. Hurricanehink 13:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok now:

8) Trivia Removed

9) Paragraphs 2 and 3 fused.

10) "Oddities in Report" changed to "Possibilities of Tropical Storm to Hurricane Status"

11) "On October 31 at 2100 UTC, 14 had a gust of 51 knots (58.65 mph). On November 3rd at 600 UTC, 14 had a gust with 55 knots (63.25 mph). That same day at 320 UTC, it had a gust of 60 knots (69 mph). A forecast that day from a NOAA aircraft, 14 had a reading of 92 mph, enough wind speed for a Category 1 hurricane. All the readings assure that 14 had tropical storm characteristics." All together.Changed "Another forecast that day" changed to "A forecast that day from a NOAA aircraft".

12) Track picture added.

13) "Elliptical 200 milibars,etc." changed to "14 ran into a low with wind shear then which caused a shearing pattern that turned 14 into a swirl of clouds due to the shear."

14) "The plane recorded a wind of 80 knots (92 mph), was recorded and the mbar was dropped to 998 along with the turbulence, which is a really unusual pressure for a depression." worked on.HurricaneCraze32 13:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I made the changes I was referring to. Do you notice any difference? That is what you should do to all of your articles. Hurricanehink 20:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
15)You say that people wont understand some of the things i wrote,i cant understand some of what you wrote.
16)You talk nothing of when 14 dissipated.
17)You've got 2 busted links.
18)Do you need to put a rainfall total at every little place?I tried to make it as simple as possible by just adding them all together.HurricaneCraze32 21:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
1) What about my edit don't you understand? The storm never dissipated. According to the TCR link, the storm was absorbed by an extratropical low which moved to the northeast. 3) Busted links are fine as long as there aren't too many of them. 4) I didn't put a rainfall total at every little place. I took the highest total at each place. I'm not sure how you got Florida's 30+ inches of rainfall. Hurricanehink 22:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I added the total rainfalls together.HurricaneCraze32 23:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Just so we're clear, you didn't add all of the rainfall totals, did you? You're only supposed to add up the rainfall totals by each city (you know, add up the totals under Havana). Otherwise, I'm not sure how you got your totals. You didn't answer my question. What about my edit don't you understand? I merely rewrote what you wrote except for I changed words here and there and I added structure. Hurricanehink 00:26, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
1) I totaled up the bottom lines of the report.
2) I am only 15-certain words i dont know yet.Only 1 part "intermittent and sporadic".HurricaneCraze32 15:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh. Well, intermittent means occassionally and sporadic means randomly. The rainfall totals are the totals for each city. You can't add the bottom totals up. Hurricanehink 15:30, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Caroline_(1975).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Caroline_(1975).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 12:31, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Hurricane Bob

The article's getting there. I don't think you should have gone ahead and published it yet, but it's too late for that. One thing, though. You need to specify where you got the picture from. Hurricanehink 19:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

What published-its still in work.The licensing I had a problem with.Here's the link.

http://www.marciawoodgallery.com/artist/taylor_katherine/images/afterm/kt_(hurricane)bob_1979_sm.jpg.HurricaneCraze32 19:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

If you post it on Wikipedia outside of your talk page, it's published. I'm sorry, but you will have to remove that picture. You indicated it is by NOAA, but based on the web address it doesn't appear to be true. Is there a website has the picture but doesn't link directly to the picture? In addition, the car picture is not in the NHC directory. You need a link for that as well. Hurricanehink 19:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok my error-both pictures are from the same website.

http://www.marciawoodgallery.com/artist/taylor_katherine/images/afterm/kt_afterimage_hurricane_sm.jpg is the car one.

All we need to do is fix the liscensing.HurricaneCraze32 19:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, those pictures are not public domain. You'll have to contact the website owner to see if they give permission for you to use it. Hurricanehink 00:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I cant contact a dead site.HurricaneCraze32 21:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Never mind.Contacted.HurricaneCraze32 22:06, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Bob-Flooding.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bob-Flooding.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 22:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

LNBS storms

Just to let you know, I moved the LNBS pages onto a user page of yours. Because they aren't part of the Wikiproject, they should not be part of Wikipedia mainspace. I fixed the links accordingly. Hurricanehink 00:16, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I never meant them to be for Wikiproject-I didn't link them to the seasons-Storm05 did!HurricaneCraze32 01:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
But you were the one who published them on the main space. If you never wanted them to be part of the Wikiproject, you should have kept on your user space. Hurricanehink 14:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
It wasnt for Wikiproject till it was done and accepted by 20+ people. Think you can help me with all 35 storms?HurricaneCraze32 19:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
All 35? Wow! First of all, many of them have no reasons to have articles (Karl, Kate, Erin, Isaac, Nicole, Erika, Florence, Floyd, Bonnie, Claudette, Marco- Klaus has an article already, Helene, Josephine, Barry, Debby, Harvey, Karl, Clara, Frances, or Caroline- unless it actually caused damage). Also, Jerry and Danny have articles. I might be able to help, but I am currently busy with my real life (graduation and homework) and my wikilife (working on bringing Mitch to FA status). You should consider saving some of the more important articles for later, and concentrate on working on existing articles. In my opinion, there's too many low-quality articles, and us at the project should be making a better effort at bettering the existing articles. Any new information can be added to the season articles for now. Hurricanehink 22:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
1) Frances has a lot of things in intrest with Emmy,Frances goes there.
2) Which Bonnie (92 or 86) 92 did little, 86 did 1.430 million-or what i read.
3) Jerry and Danny-i'll have it distinctly diffrent to Storm05's.
4) Matthew and Michael you let go? Odd...HurricaneCraze32 00:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
First, no 2 storms share an article, with the exception of Atlantic/EPAC crossovers. Frances could be mentioned in an Emmy article, though the storm did nothing on its own. For example, you could say, "In the Fujiwhara interaction with Hurricane Frances to its east, Emmy turned to the north" or something like that. There's no need to have Frances as a page as its own. 92 Bonnie did little (only 1 death). You can't have distinctly different articles with Jerry and Danny. If there's anything you have that Storm05 doesn't, feel free to add it to the existing article. Also, you don't own an article. Storm05 may have made those articles, but he doesn't own it. That means that once something is published on the main space, it is up for grabs for anyone to edit. There is no yours, unless it is on your user space. The ones I listed have no reasons for articles. Matthew and Michael could have reason. Every landfalling U.S. tropical storm since 2003 probably has enough information for an article, so Matthew is possible, though it is by no means notable. Michael struck Newfoundland as a moderate hurricane, something almost unheard of. It is probably recent enough to find some decent information. Hurricanehink 01:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Can you help me get more Storm History for Bonnie '86? and how to make an archive?HurricaneCraze32 22:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Some LNBS Help.

Sure, just tell me what you need me to do and I'll try to help. -- RattleMan 21:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Try to get Karl (2004), Kate (2003), Edouard (1996),Erika (1997) and Cleo (1958) cleaned up.HurricaneCraze32 21:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/i/t/User_talk%7EMitchazenia_Archive3_966c.html"