[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/Jump to content

User talk:Tdwuhs

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

Hello, {{subst:PAGENAME}}, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make mistakes at some point, here is what Wikipedia is not, which might help you out. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to ask me, check the help pages, or add {{helpme}} to this page, and someone'll be along shortly.

Happy editing! -[[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] [[additions | e-mail]] 02:44, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Number of Storms

[edit]

Smarty? Hope that was used lightheartedly. 2nd, I'm not sure what you mean by in sequence. Zapp seemed to have grasped it. I would guess the same thing he did and say the most storms ever to form in a season is 21 in 1933. The 21 names on the modern naming list are based on that season.

E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 03:24, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All good. Check out this link to see the tracks of the 21 storms of 1933.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 00:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The most hurricanes to form in a season is 12 in 1969 the longest streak of unbroken hurricane formation was 7 in 1950. Tropical Storm How broke the trend (yes How, they used the Joint Army/Navy Phonetic Alphabet to name storms back then). Able-Category 4, Baker-Category 3, Charlie-3, Dog-Category 5, Easy-3, Fox-4, George-Category 2. That also stands as the longest streak of major hurricane formation, with six forming in succession. 1950 has the highest ACE index. 13 storms, 11 hurricanes, and 8 major hurricanes formed that season, no season has had more major hurricanes. 1961 was close, with 7.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 13:04, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well I guess it does, if you don't count tropical depressions, probably tied with someone though, I'll have to dig around in UNISYS.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 22:11, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Tied for first now with Wilma. To answer your question, I believe it already is.
E. Brown, Hurricane enthusiast - Squawk Box 23:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing!

[edit]

Well, first off, I don't know what you're getting so angry about. I couldn't quite understand what you said on the talk page of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season. What's the harm in that? There's no reason to get mad at me for not understanding what you said. I read it as carefully as I could. Secondly, how in the hell is the NHC a burden, and is there really any reason it needs to be improved? Tell me how it can be improved. Thirdly, building every building to withstand "Mother Nature's Fury" (I assume you mean a cat 5 hurricane) would be expensive and damn near impossible. Fourth, I never said that the NHC had anything to do with Katrina. Fifth, what the hell does me being in high school have to do with anything? Please answer every one of these questions. Me being a highschooler has no merit here on Wikipedia. To me, everybody is the same age. bob rulz 01:10, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NHC

[edit]

You're right that it's constructive criticism of your congressmen not of the NHC. Based on the earlier part of the discussion it sounded like budget cuts were part of the NHC problem. However my point was anything posted on a discussion forum of wikipedia is not constructive criticism because it's not directed at the NHC; it's directed at totally random people and is not in any way constructive (though it may be interesting). If you want to contact the NHC and tell them how they should be doing things better, that too would be constructive criticism. Jdorje 01:12, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About the block

[edit]

Hello, I just noticed your email. Note that I didn't block you because you were moving the images per se, but because you did it four times during a 24-hour period, which is a violation of the Three-revert rule, which is designed to discourage revert-warring and encourage discussion. I looked through the edit history of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season page, and no other user broke the rule during the 24-hour period, so I didn't block anyone else. However, now that you've gotten an account that will not be reflected on your block log. Hope you like it here and decide to stay, Titoxd(?!?) 05:23, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 1972 season

[edit]

Sorry, I've been away for a few days. To answer your question, Hurricane Betty evolved from Subtropical Storm Bravo. See that storm's summery in the article. Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 02:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Archives

[edit]

Sorry, they're extensive and graphics intensive. I have tropical cyclone lists for every season back to 1948, some of which I could upload onto a single user subpage. I probably won't Wikify them if I do that though. They do have some interesting information. The coolest stuff, however, is the, unfortunately, graphics intensive Msoft Word pages I have. They are pages for induvidual season with a satellite photo for each storm. I won't make one unless I have good sat photos for at least half the storms. I use tracks from UNISYS as a last resort when no sat photos are available. -- Hurricane Eric - my dropsonde - archive 14:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gamma

[edit]

Yup. §HurricaneERIC§ archive 14:25, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Post Analysis

[edit]

Plenty. I don't know all of them off the top of my head though. Erika in 2003 was upgraded to a Hurricane in post-analysis. -- §HurricaneERIC§ archive 22:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Dream Boy

[edit]

Hi there. I submitted the article and I do think, like you, that it's a great book. I've read many of the novels written on the delicate subject of man/boy and boy/boy love and I found it a moving experience... ~Tony

Possibly unfree Image:Beavers hass 1029.jpg

[edit]
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Beavers hass 1029.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 22:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]