User talk:Evolauxia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am currently only an intermittently active editor, but I will respond to my talk page, and to requests here from projects with which I was involved. Evolauxia 17:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Anti-twister

Thanks for the proper term for an anti-twister. I've never been keen on that title either; basically, I just threw something there so it wouldn't get deleted way back when. Now it has a proper home, under Anticyclonic tornado. Anti-twister is now just a redirect. BTW, welcome aboard! Denni☯ 23:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

  • I originally merely added the comment but left the article, until I reread it and saw tornado rotation attributed to Coriolis effect. They are too small to be generated from this. I'll revise the new article.
    • If you reread it, you'll see that it is the parent thunderstorm's rotation to which the article refers. It would certainly be incorrect to attribute a tornado's rotation to the Coriolis effect. Denni☯ 03:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
      • I have edited the article to best reflect the current understanding of the anticyclonic tornado phenomenon (though I've not yet completed it), which isn't understood well, indeed, the exact process of tornadogenesis itself is not yet understood. Evolauxia 09:19, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tornado Weather in Australia

Hi Evolauxia, just looking at your edit on the Buladelah Tornado... can you ellaborate on the "classic setup for violent tornadoes"? Also I'm not convinced there's something really special about Canada, Bangladesh, and India for violent tornadoes. Glancing at the graphs in this article [1] seem to suggest that in most places around the world, tornado intensity distributions are similar (the UK and France being opposite exceptions, possibly for reporting-related reasons). Australia gets a moderate number of tornadoes (a few reports per state per year), sometimes they're significant and occasionally they're violent. -- pde

One must be careful with what those graphs actually mean, though indeed, in that paper there is a quite similar distribution of F-scale categories for most regions of the world that experience tornadoes. Note, however, the datasets for all other regions are much longer than the US dataset, yet overall numbers are still much lower. Consult the number of observed tornadoes by intensity in Tables 5 and 6. Although they occur, and the populations should be aware of this, violent tornadoes are somewhat rare outside the regions I mentioned; and it is (theorized) due to lesser occurrences of favorable environmental parameters, including in other works by one of the coauthors of the paper you cited (Brooks). No F5 tornadoes have been confirmed outside the U.S. and Canada, in fact, some European tornadoes are overrated.
These environmental parameters are what I was alluding to when I mentioned 'classic setup' and it's a somewhat complex thing to get in to with adequate treatment. Essentially, to get the requisite meteorological setups with much frequency seems to require a certain geography that is somewhat unique to North America and that area of southern Asia. Various features provide for a high frequency of warm, moist, unstable low levels with dry air at mid-levels, capping inversions setup just right, various jet streams and colder air aloft (lapse rates), and a wind shear profile which is somewhat rare (increasing speeds AND anticyclonic veering with height, esp. 1-3km and 1km AGL for the veering) especially in conjunction with all other requisite conditions. FWIW, I think there are underreporting issues in places like China and Russia, potentially other areas, and Australia (lower population density, and possible tornadoes with intense offshore supercells).
I was able to find very little information on this tornado, but given its significance it certainly deserves a better article, as do some other Australian events (such as Bucca and Sandon). Evolauxia 10:52, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
I've started articles on the Brighton tornado and the south coast tornado. Maybe we should also do the Northam tornado if we can clear the rights to the photos... -- pde 04:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Good. Seems fine to me for articles on said and similar events. They could also be linked either on the main global listing of significant events and/or the coming seasonal (or decadal/centennial for further back) global summary articles. Evolauxia 07:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Sadly, I don't know anything about the Tuggerah Lakes tornado. Might require a call to the NSW beureau of meterology, or some digging through contemporary newspapers. -- pde 01:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heritability of Stature

Great to hear you're going to take this on! I'll take a look for more references. Off the top of my head I seem to remember a bunch of really interesting discussion about long bone growth and prenatal hormone exposure in the last few pages of Martin & Nguyen (2004) Anthropometric analysis of homosexuals and heterosexuals: implications for early hormone exposure. Hormones and Behavior 45: 31 – 39. Cheers, Pete.Hurd 17:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Accumulative generation effect

Hi, I just read the article about Human height. From what I could gather, you should be the one who wrote:

Thus, there is an accumulative generation effect such that nutrition and health over generations influences the height of descendants to varying degrees.

I'm very interested in this. There could be some interesting parallels in explaining the change over time of characters other than height. Could you tell me of some reference(s) where I can find more detail about this effect? (I can get almost anything at my university). Cheers, F4810 09:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I poorly articulated that section, I intend to rewrite the manuscript of the article eventually. Anyway, I know of no papers that specifically cover this, though it might be addressed in some pediatric or auxological books. Some papers touch upon it such as when covering prenatal growth, I'll dig them up. Evolauxia 10:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article move

Hi, Late-November 2005 Tornado Outbreak would normally have lower case 't' and 'o'. Any reason to break convention? Rich Farmbrough 11:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I moved it because specific tornado outbreaks are considered to be proper, they're specifically identifiable events by their name (like hurricanes but less regimented), and all the other outbreaks are thus capitalized so I moved it to fit this. I did it early before people recognized the first name and before there would be links to it. Evolauxia 00:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] {{infobox tornado outbreak}}

Fair enough, the infobox was loosely based off the hurricane one, hence the windspeed. NSLE (T+C) 01:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tornado events (Nov 1992 Outbreak)

Thanks for your comments on my comments to the List of Tornadoes and Tornado Outbreaks. Still attempting some sporadic work on this; I just added a draft/article for the November 1992 outbreak, it's in need of some work, but I'll clean it up over the next few days. Any contributions would be welcome. David--Davidals

[edit] Coincidence indeed!

Thanks for your efforts as well. . .can we use a redirect on category pages? I was soing to put a redirect from Category:Saint Louisians to Category:St. Louisans. Will that work? If so, I'll do the same with St. Louisans and St. Louisians. I always type St. Louis by habit and hate having to spell it out. TMS63112 06:21, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

ThanksTMS63112 07:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Category:Television stations in St. Louis

Sounds good to me, i see no problems with a minor detail such as that. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 22:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tornado winds

I feel that, if the information is available from the NWS local offices, it should be included. However, it should have to be proven from there. CrazyC83 17:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay thanks for the information, that column should now be removed. CrazyC83 19:07, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ePodunk External Links

Was ePodunk used as source or a reference in the article on Saint Louis. If so it should probably be described as a source or reference.

Also ePodunk seems to have excessive advertising on it and could be considered link spam. I didn't want to remove the link again untill I found out more about why it keeps re-appearing on the article.

I used the following guidlines on External Links when I removed the link.

Thanks, --Colin Faulkingham 00:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I've added it because it's a decent place/geography site with its collection of information, and is provided for some other cities. I think more should be represented than just city government and tourist sites if the other sites are "reputable". Epodunk isn't pushing anything but does have a lot of google ads, so I could see an argument made on excessive ads. Evolauxia 04:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your addition on Weather forecasting

Hey, I saw your edit on the weather forecasting page. It sounds very similar to this quote I found some years ago:

"Imagine a system on a rotating sphere that is 8000 miles wide, consists of different materials, different gases that have different properties (one of the most important of which, water, exists in different concentrations), heated by a nuclear reactor 93 million miles away. Then just to make life interesting, this sphere is oriented such that, as it revolves around the nuclear reactor, it is heated differently at different locations at different times of the year. Then someone is asked to watch the mixture of gases, a fluid only 20 miles deep, that covers an area of 250 million square miles, and to predict the state of that fluid at one point on the sphere two days from now. This is the problem the weather forecaster faces."

When I found this quote, it was attributed to Bob Ryan. What do you think of replacing the unsourced quote with this one? EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 21:56, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. After posting my message, I decided to check it out and found multiple sites that quoted him including couple that cited when/where he said it, such as this one. I'll make the change and include where he published this quote. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 22:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again for all your help. Interesting how both of the quotes we found were somewhat distorted versions of the original, but I suppose that's the nature of quotes, constantly changing from one report to another. Kind of a shame, since yours with the frozen poles and such and my previous one that mentioned water vapor add even more complexities to weather forecasting. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 22:19, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pages up for deletion

Revolution within the form is up for deletion. Can I ask for a vote to "Transwiki". Thanks.WHEELER 23:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tropical Cyclones

You said at the Wikiproject Tropical Cyclones page that "As a meteorologist, I have a background in atmospheric sciences, as well as access to journals, conferences, and experts". Would it be possible for you to eventually use your access to journals etc to help me find death and damage totals for tropical cyclones from Pacific hurricane seasons from 1972-1987. The NHC reports are available after 1988 and the Monthly Weather Review is free online before 1973. Between those years is a "hole" where death and damage information, if it is online without having to pay anything, is scattered about in pieces everywhere. I thought that you might be able to eventually find information regarding those cyclones since you have access to journals. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 22:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me that the MWR was available... I never noticed the change. Thanks again. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:04, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 tornado season

Forecasters say that there is a chance of an outbreak tomorrow into Thursday in the central US. I am keeping a close eye on it - at this point the conditions are not as volatile as, say, last November 15th (which had been predicted 2-3 days in advance), but it could still be major. Should a new general page Tornadoes of 2006 be created to cover everything that does not warrant outbreak articles? BTW, the WikiProject you suggested I am working on - as a major part of Meteorology and Weather Events. The project page is User:CrazyC83/Meteorology. CrazyC83 23:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Its okay. CrazyC83 05:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] March 30-31

I definitely see something big here. While it is still too early to call it a big outbreak imminent, I see a potential for a major tornado event with the possibility open for a 20-state super outbreak stretching from the upper Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. One to watch for sure! Talk:Tornadoes of 2006 has a section to discuss the potential outbreak. CrazyC83 05:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article formatting

Dear Tropical cyclone editor,

As a member of the Tropical Cyclone Wikiproject, you are receiving this message to describe how you can better tropical cyclone articles. There are hundreds of tropical cyclone articles, though many of them are poorly organized and lacking in information. Using the existing featured articles as a guide line, here is the basic format for the ideal tropical cyclone article.

  1. Infobox- Whenever possible, the infobox should have a picture for the tropical cyclone. The picture can be any uploaded picture about the storm, though ideally it should be a satellite shot of the system. If that is not available, damage pictures, either during the storm or after the storm, are suitable. In the area that says Formed, indicate the date on which the storm first developed into a tropical depression. In the area that says Dissipated, indicate the date on which the storm lost its tropical characteristics. This includes when the storm became extratropical, or if it dissipated. If the storm dissipated and reformed, include the original start date and the final end date. Highest winds should be the local unit of measurement for speed (mph in non-metric countries, km/h in metric countries), with the other unit in parenthesis. The lowest pressure should be in mbars. Damages should, when available, be in the year of impact, then the present year. The unit of currency can be at your discretion, though typically it should be in USD. Fatalities indicate direct deaths first, then indirect deaths. Areas affected should only be major areas of impact. Specific islands or cities should only be mentioned if majority of the cyclone's effects occurred there.
  2. Intro- The intro for every article should be, at a minimum, 2 paragraphs. For more impacting hurricanes, it should be 3. The first should describe the storm in general, including a link to the seasonal article, its number in the season, and other statistics. The second should include a brief storm history, while the third should be impact.
  3. Storm history- The storm history should be a decent length, relatively proportional to the longevity of the storm. Generally speaking, the first paragraph should be the origins of the storm, leading to the system reaching tropical storm status. The second should be the storm reaching its peak. The third should be post-peak until landfall and dissipation. This section is very flexible, depending on meteorological conditions, but it should generally be around 3. Storm histories can be longer than three paragraphs, though they should be less than five. Anything more becomes excessive. Remember, all storm impacts, preparations, and records can go elsewhere. Additional pictures are useful here. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its peak, use a landfall picture in the storm history. If the picture in the infobox is of the storm at its landfall, use the peak. If the landfall is its peak, use a secondary peak, or even a random point in the storm's history.
  4. Preparations- The preparations section can be any length, depending on the amount of preparations taken by people for the storm. Hurricane watches and warnings need to be mentioned here, as well as the number of people evacuated from the coast. Include numbers of shelters, and other info you can find on how people prepared for the storm.
  5. Impact- For landfalling storms, the impact section should be the majority of the article. First, if the storm caused deaths in multiple areas, a death table would work well in the top level impact section. A paragraph of the general effects of the storm is also needed. After the intro paragraph, impact should be broken up by each major area. It depends on the information, but sections should be at least one paragraph, if not more. In the major impact areas, the first paragraph should be devoted to meteorological statistics, including rainfall totals, peak wind gusts on land, storm surge, wave heights, beach erosion, and tornadoes. The second should be actual damage. Possible additional paragraphs could be detailed information on crop damage or specifics. Death and damage tolls should be at the end. Pictures are needed, as well. Ideally, there would be at least one picture for each sub-section in the impact, though this sometimes can't happen. For storms that impact the United States or United States territories, this site can be used for rainfall data, including an image of rainfall totals.
  6. Aftermath- The aftermath section should describe foreign aid, national aid, reconstruction, short-term and long-term environmental effects, and disease. Also, the storm's retirement information, whether it happened or not, should be mentioned here.
  7. Records- This is optional, but can't hurt to be included.
  8. Other- The ideal article should have inline sourcing, with the {{cite web}} formatting being preferable. Always double check your writing and make sure it makes sense.

Good luck with future writing, and if you have a question about the above, don't hesitate to ask.

Hurricanehink (talk) 19:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #2

The July issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Cheers, thanks! Pete.Hurd 04:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of tornadoes and tornado outbreaks

I had actually forgotten about that proposal, but I'm glad you agree. Do you mind if I just dig in and start moving events to their new respective pages? -Runningonbrains 19:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] European tornadoes

Hi, there is list of all known tornadoes in Czech Republic and of some in Slovak Republic at Czech Hydrometeorological Institute (in czech), many with photos and videos. The strongest confirmed tornado was F3, but tornado research in Central Europe began only couple of years ago. There aro also some historical ones in the list. I will incorporate some significant ones in couple of days. I don't know any claim of F5 tornado in Europe. I can try find some other sources from Central Europe countries. --Vladimír Fuka 13:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Health Wiki Research

A colleague and I are conducting a study on health wikis. We are looking at how wikis co-construct health information and create communities. We noticed that you are a frequent contributor to Wikipedia on health topics.

Please consider taking our survey here.

This research will help wikipedia and other wikis understand how health information is co-created and used.

We are from James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. Our university research committee approved the project.

Thanks, Corey 15:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Huronian
Metrolink San Bernardino Line
Bob Hope Airport Train Station
Miami tornadoes of 2003
Mesoarchean
Tom Gola Arena
Eoarchean
Albert Pujols
Ostracoderm
The Quarterly Review of Biology
Paleoarchean
Louisville Slugger Field
Icarus (journal)
Chemotroph
National Severe Storms Laboratory
Neoarchean
Alumni Memorial Fieldhouse
The Human Tornado
Tornado plasma hypothesis
Cleanup
Brooks-Pioneer Village, Kentucky Tornado
Storm Stories
NCAA Women's Division I Basketball Championship
Merge
Pittsfield, Ohio
Wind shear
Dangerous goods
Add Sources
Scientific journal
Prehistoric fish
Gentleman Jim Carter
Wikify
Oakfield Tornado
Louis Benito Middle School
Louis Auguste Blanqui
Expand
Voting Rights Act
CBS Evening News
Panderichthys

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 13:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biometeorology

I saw that you have an interest in biometeorology and a link to the potential page on your ToDo list. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, but I'm finishing up a course I'm taking on it right now, and I was thinking about trying to get the page started. Do you have any support/tips/etc. you'd like to share (even if it's "Don't even try, new guy!")? Jason Patton 20:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Enhanced Fujita Scale

Hi you changed my edit on the Enhanced Fujita Scale page there has been a EF5 here's proof.--Pediaguy16 18:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

http://www.kake.com/breakingnews/7347256.html

Its an EF5 image because that's were it was when it was a EF5.--Pediaguy16 19:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greensburg outbreak

Probably, they will wait after conducting all the surveys before publishing the summary. And there are a lot of surveys to be done (and across the same region), And I think considering the moderate threat for the same region, they will probably focus more on today's event which I hope won't be as bad as there were 92 reports + 2 others in the wind reports. Probably, tomorrow or Tuesday at late, they will published it.--JForget 19:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks

Hey, good start on Elizabeth F. Emens. If similar articles are in your sphere of interest, you may consider joining WP:LGBT. =) ··coelacan 07:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to LGBT studies!

Hi, Evolauxia, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies!

We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful:

  • Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able.
  • Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
  • The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, peer review and a project-wide article collaboration, all of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there.
  • If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics.
  • If you're planning to stay, have a square in our quilt! You can put anything you want in it.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome!

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 16:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kurzewil's Law

I've removed the trasclusion of Kurzewil's Law from the AfD log since it is a redirect and not an article with an Afd tag. Personally, I think the redirect doesn't harm, but in case you want to get rid of it, you can mark it for sepepdy deletion as a page created in error with {{db-author}}.--Tikiwont 12:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll do that. Evolauxia 12:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
To make it visible, however, you have to put the tag before the redirect. --Tikiwont 12:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again, and I could use the spell checker, myself. Evolauxia 12:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Abell

I've actually been working on a draft article for Ben Abell for some time now, and wonder if you would like to see and/or incorporate what I've developed? Or would rather I did? I was really surprised to find Ben Abell not a redlink anymore!--I didn't really expect anybody else to develop the article. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 12:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, Ben Abell, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created on June 23 where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, — pd_THOR | =/\= | 15:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

The 15th OWS, huh? I'm stationed at Scott, I wonder if they could provide me with anything for the article (WP:V, of course). Of course, USAF pictures are public domain, I wonder if they have any pictures I could either that would be appropriate. I thought living so close it should be easy enough to get a free-use picture of him, but thinking on it, I don't really know I would go about it. Are you in the area and/or acquainted with him so as you could possibly get a good picture taken for the article? (BTW, we've already scattered this conversation before I put the notice on my talk page, however you want to chat for this if fine with me.) — pd_THOR | =/\= | 15:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Generally, I go back and forth, which fragments the conversation but is usually trackable when it's only two people, but I defer to the preference of whomever I'm communicating. I'm a former student of Abell's and was briefly in the USAF before (honorably) discharged. I may be able to get a photo of him, and there's a decent chance that the OWS has some too. Other potential sources are the STL NWS or STL/SLU AMS. I actually took some photos of him at SLU (and perhaps STL, I don't recall) AMS meetings, but I don't think any would work well for the article, though I'll check. Evolauxia 16:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks! I'll do the same at the OWS. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 16:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AIV

I've taken the report off as it seems just a misguided user, not really vandalism. Get his article deleted as you have through AfD and then see what he does. --Steve (Stephen) talk 00:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFD

Can RFD's also "kill" a tornado or tornadogenisis, or does it only help them form? Ks0stm 16:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Earth system science

so try to write an article on it. and how is it the leading one--in what specialty?DGG (talk) 06:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citing Sources

How can (if allowed) I cite an e-mail as a source? In this case, it is an e-mail from a forecaster at the Storm Prediction Center on what constitutes a severe weather outbreak, I would like to use it as a source on Severe weather. --Ks0stm 13:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I added the information under outbreaks on the Severe weather page. --Ks0stm 17:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FAR for Tornado

Great work on expanding the tornado article even further after its FAC. I think you're work is great, you added a lot of stuff I never would have thought to add. Are you going to be making any more significant additions to the article? If not, I'd like to request a Featured Article Review for the article. While I highly doubt it will be removed from its featured status, it would be nice to receive comments from the community in general, since the article has changed so drastically (1000 revisions!!) since it was awarded that status. What do you think? -RunningOnBrains 17:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fire whirls -reply

Hello there, I have had a read of the article Fire whirl, (compliments on your contributions), and it seems to me to be about as complete as possible, considering the paucity of published research on the subject. The additions, made by me to Dust devil (Related phenomena) came from my own observations during bush fire fighting. Classical physics requires, for generation of a vortex, preservation of both angular momentum and mass; but within a bush fire it is unlikely that the latter can be achieved because of the turbulence of the burning inflowing air and gases. The matter is further confused because, unlike a hot air vortex (a dust devil), thermal energy is being added within the fire whirl by the burning, rotating & rising gases; further the very high temperature difference between the flame of the fire whirl and surrounding air promotes mixing of the two, thus destroying the boundary layer as seen in dust devils with high vertical development. It can also be noted that, above a fire whirl, the smoke and ash debris does not (in my observations) form a vortical shape-- instead a confused turbulent upward flow. The best I can summarise is that the initiating mechanism of a fire whirl is similar to that of a dust devil, but that once formed the mechanisms appear to be dissimilar. Best wishes Geoffrey Wickham 00:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
PS: If you go to Vortex engine, > External link AVE, > Links in sidebar, > Atmospheric Vortex Tower, > photos - Firewhirl : this is a good photo of artificially created firewhirl. The associated text indicates that their attempt at producing an artificial atmospheric vortex was not successful.Geoffrey Wickham 02:44, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fire whirls - further comment

May I comment, with constructive intent, on the 3 photos to which you linked in your 26 July edit. I contend that only photo 3 shows a fire whirl, and that 1 & 2 show a smoke/debris devil arising after the fire has been doused or has died down leaving smouldering debris. An experiment can be conducted to demonstrate the difference between the two. Make up a 'wand' of ~ 5cm of fine cotton attached to the tip of a BBQ skewer. Take a 1 litre tin and cut vertical slots in the lower side, each ~1 cm apart and ~4 cm high. Using flat nose pliers bend the metal between the slots to form vanes at ~15 deg to the tangent. Put the tin on an electric hotplate set to low and take the base temp up to ~ 80c. Into the centre bottom of the tin place a small amount of dry fine garden mulch (or cigarette tobacco); pour a small amount of ethyl alcohol on the mulch & ignite with a match. A fire whirl of burning alcohol vapour will result. Hold the wand vertically above the flame and it will be seen that the cotton tuft will tend to turn erratically upwards, with no rotation. Once the alcohol is consumed the mulch will smoulder, producing a smoke vortex extending well above the top of the can (assuming no draughts inthe room). Introduce the wand into the rising smoke, or a little above it, and the cotton tuft will rotate indicating the presence of a true vortex similar to a dust devil. Thus, I contend that a 'fire whirl' is comprised of burning gases in a vortical form but with little or no vortex in the hot rising air above the flame. Photo 3 is interesting in showing very high vertical development of the fire whirl; probably due to the radial inflow of air to the 'very hot spot' having much greater velocity than the tangental flow; thus the point of equilibrium between the radial and tangental velocities is at a small radius. This can be demonstrated with the tin can experiment by cutting wider slots so that the radial inflow is increased. Would appreciate your comments in response. Best, Geoff Geoffrey Wickham 02:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fire whirls further

Thank you for the comprehensive reply & links. I go along with you, as regards a Wikipedia article, in "lumping all whirls caused by fire into the fire whirl category" -- considering the complexity of atmospheric phenomena this is sensible.

Re " non-vortical turbulent upward flow" my perception comes mainly from experiments conducted which ranged from the 'tin can' as described, to a complex outdoor apparatus 1m dia with adjustable peripheral vanes. Summarising:

  • heating the underside of the base produces an invisible vortex which can be detected well above the walls of the apparatus (using the wand method). The height reached depends on multiple variables.
  • placing smouldering material within the base produces smoke which allows the vortex to be seen, but otherwise the results are similar to above.
  • causing flame within the apparatus by placing a tray of a mix of gasoline & oil in the base creates a flame of burning gases having a vortical shape. The dark smoke from the oil does not show a vortical form above the flame -- just rising turbulent flow. No rotation can be detected above the flame when using the wand method.

RegardsGeoffrey Wickham 00:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F. Thank you. Delivered on behalf of user:xaosflux 01:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tornado emergency

It has been mentionned in the Wikiproject Severe Weather talk page but here is a link to the discussion.--JForget 01:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Enigma tornado outbreak and Grazulis

Hey there-

I've been working on some ongoing upgrading to various E Coast-related tornado articles; sourcing and referencing, and adding details.

First, I was wondering if (when you have a little time) you would mind doing a read-through of the Enigma tornado outbreak article. The work I've done thus far is referenced from many newspaper sources, and pieces of Finley's tornado study, which appeared in 1886. Most of this material is anecdotal, rather than scientifically precise, but it does include an abundance of locations and (vague) desctiptions. The article doesn't correspond to the usual formatting of outbreak-related articles, due to the disparate nature of the sources and the general lack of scientific precision in most of them. There's virtually no easily accessible material on this outbreak (I've had to dig very hard to find what sources I've been able to come up with), so I'd like to get a decent article together on the outbreak. Some feedback on tightening up the article, if needed, would be appreciated.

Do you have access to any of Grazulis' material, specifically anything detailing individual storms during this outbreak? I think some of this material would be of use, so I'd like someone with access to the big Grazulis book to make some contributions when possible. I'd be curious to see what he had to say about the overall outbreak.

Davidals 20:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the note and the look/work on the article. Valuable suggestions; I'm still working on assembling further info. The Finley study BTW is excerpted in some AMS studies and is available online; I'll look for the link and pass it on. I haven't reproduced any of his charts - the book appears to be a government work, at least commissioned by the Army, but I am uncertain of the precise copyright status. There are two weather charts made as the event unfolded, along with Finley's graph of tornado tracks, and I do have uploadable JPEGs of this material.
  • Likewise, the Montgomery NWS office has (available online) an archival publication/survey of all tornadoes they were able to definitely source and verify, 1880-1925, in that state, and detailed path maps of the Enigma tornadoes are included in that information.

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

[edit] pick a journal ... any journal

Hi, could you pick an old journal in a field that you are familiar with for a future collaboration project; enter it under "Nominations for future CotW:" in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Academic_Journals#Planning_ahead. btw, Thanks for tagging all the Category:Earth and atmospheric sciences journals. John Vandenberg 01:33, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Oceanography project proposal

It looks like the project above has at least enough members to be at least a functional task force, possibly of WikiProject Physics. Have you considered contacting that project and seeing if they would be willing to take on such a task force? It would make the work in creating and, later, maintaining all the templates and whatnot quite a bit easier. John Carter 13:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 21:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WPTC Active Members

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones has changed greatly since it was first started, and according to our main page we now have 87 members. However, we only have a small group of members that are still active, and as such, I am sending this out to all users on the participants list. If you are still active, please sign your name here. If you do not wish to be part of the project any more, or if you do not answer to this, you will be placed on an inactive users list after a period of two weeks. If you wish to rejoin after you are put on the inactive users list, you are welcome to rejoin. Cheers. --Hurricanehink (talk) 18:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Winter storms

There is a discussion started by User:Juliancolton at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology about a proposed/possible new WikiProject called WikiProject Winter storms. Feel free to voice your opinion on the proposal. JForget 01:05, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:METEO Active members

User:Juliancolton/Active

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Severe Weather Newsletter

A newsletter has been started for WP:SEVERE at Wikipedia:WikiProject Severe weather/Newsletter. Newsletter editors are currently in need of nominations for featured member to finish the newsletter before the begining of the month. Nominations are accepted at the above link. User: Southern Illinois SKYWARN and User:Juliancolton —Preceding comment was added at 23:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Severe Weather Newsletter (February 2008)

The WikiProject Severe weather NewsletterVol. I, No. 1, Issue 1, February 2008
If you would like to delete this message, the original is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Severe weather/Newsletter/February 2008

[edit] Welcome

Welcome to the first monthly issue of the WikiProject Severe weather newsletter! In this issue, we will welcome you to the newsletter, and give you an idea of what the project is about, what it has done, and what it plans to do. So, enjoy reading the February 2008 issue! If you have not signed up to receive the newsletter, you may do so at the newsletter page. If you do not sign up, you will not receive the next newsletter!

[edit] New project articles

[edit] Featured story

This featured story focuses on the relative WikiWork for this project. The relative WikiWork is the measure of how lose a project is to having every article featured. It is a complex calculation;

ω = a + 2g + 3b + 4s + 5t

where a is A-class articles, g is GA-class articles, b is B-class articles, s is start-class articles, and t is stub-class articles.

Thus, the closer you are to 0 (zero), the closer you are to having every article featured. The WikiWork number for every class is added, then divided by the number of articles, similar to averaging, and it is found that the relative WikiWork for this project is Ω = 4.182. Ω is a symbol for the relative WikiWork factor. That is not the best number, as we are closer to 5 than we are to 0, and we are very close to 5. This means that the majority of the articles in the project are either stub, or start. That is what we need to change. So, while more severe weather articles are good, we should try not to publish as many stub class, and fewer start class articles.

[edit] Wikiwork statistics

Severe weather
articles		 Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 1 1 2
Good article GA 2 7 3 12
B 4 8 16 14 42
Start 6 19 69 64 158
Stub 1 6 21 57 1 86
List 1 11 19 1 32
Assessed 12 36 125 157 2 332
Unassessed 2 2
Total 12 36 125 157 4 334

[edit] Members section

New members User:Juliancolton (Talk) The most recent user to join the project, but is very active. User:Juliancolton is also an editor of this newsletter.

Featured member User:CrazyC83 is this month's featured member for WikiProject Severe weather. (The following text is from User:JForget's nomination.) User:CrazyC83 - One of the most active (if not the most) members in recent tornado activity coverage and monitoring. Recent examples of this includes the February-March 2007 Tornado Outbreak in Alabama and Missouri, the May 2007 Tornado Outbreak in Kansas and Oklahoma and the January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence in Missouri, Wisconsin, Arkansas, Mississippi and Alabama. Had also made coverage in non-article tornado events such as the New Orleans tornado event on February 13, 2007 and the tornado event associated with the Superstorm of December 16, 2007. User:CrazyC83 made numerous edits, more than one hundred, to 2008 Super Tuesday tornado outbreak.

[edit] Significant storms

Main article: January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence

Significant storms last month included the outbreak in the United States in early to mid-January that produced 71 tornadoes and killed three people. Several tornado emergencies were issued in association with supercells during this outbreak. This outbreak was very similar to a classic spring severe weather outbreak, but extending farther north than even most late season outbreaks. The hardest hit areas on January 7 were the Springfield, Missouri metropolitan area and areas immediately to the north of Chicago, three people were killed near Springfield throughout the Southwestern Missouri Ozarks. On January 8, my area, the Tri-State region of Evansville, Indiana, was hit with the tornado outbreak. Only a few funnel clouds were reported in my area. Most tornadoes of the day were confined to the Memphis, Tennessee area and Eastern Arkansas, where one person was killed. On January 9 only a few wind and hail reports were received[1]. On January 10, however, the action started back up. More tornadic storms developed across the Southern United States, including several significant storms that produced tornadoes. These tornadoes severely damaged rual towns in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. The most notable of these tornadoes was reported in Lamar County, Alabama where 1 person was injured as several buildings were destroyed in this EF-3 tornado.

Five more deaths (three by tornadoes and two by straight-line winds) were reported on January 29 from a series of scattered tornadoes and a serial derecho across the Ohio Valley stretching south into Arkansas.[2]

[edit] References

  1. ^ http://spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/080109_rpts.html SPC reports for January 9
  2. ^ Storm Prediction Center 20080129's Storm Reports

For more references see January 2008 Tornado Outbreak Sequence

Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 14:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Academic Journals Collaboration notice

The current WikiProject Academic Journals Collaboration of the Week is
Electrical Experimenter
Please help to improve this article to the highest of standards.

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceanography

I've proposed on the talk page of the above named project which you created that perhaps the scope and name of the project be changed to reflect more of a focus on oceans in general, rather than specifically oceanography. Oceanography would still be included within the scope of the project, however, and, if the project grows big enough, would certainly be one of the first likely subprojects. Please indicate your opinion of the possible change on that page. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered by SatyrBot around 17:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC) SatyrBot (talk) 17:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of tornadoes striking downtown areas

I'll start on the cleanup as soon as i get the chance. I have Kenner, Louisiana tornado included because the tornado travelled from New Orleans into it. Same with the Los Angeles-area tornadoes.  :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 17:26, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: R

Hello. I don't want to revert your addition, but the Reich entry absolutely needs a citation. Every entry on this list has one. Could you dig one up? (If you're using the autobiography, that's fine but need the usual details.) Thanks! Rivertorch (talk) 16:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Micrometeorology

I'd assume you have it on your watchlist, but just in case, I did throw a little something about my concern in merging with microscale meteorology on the talk. Jason Patton (talk) 05:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)