Talk:2021–22 South Pacific cyclone season

Location of advisories

RSMC Nadi

Marine Bulletins
Tropical Disturbance Summary
Tropical Cyclone Naming Bulletin
Tropical Disturbance Advisory
International Marine Warnings
Cyclone Gale/Storm Warnings
Cyclone Hurricane Warnings
Cyclone Track Maps
3-Day Tropical Cyclone Outlook

TCWC Wellington

Cyclone Warning
Marine Weather Bulletin for Subtropic
Marine Weather Bulletin for Forties
Marine Weather Bulletin for Pacific
Marine Weather Bulletin for Southern

Special Weather Bulletins

Fiji
Northern Cook Islands
Southern Cook Islands
Niue
Tonga
Wallis and Futuna
Samoa
Solomon Islands
French Polynesia
New Caledonia

Other links

Tropical Disturbance Advisories Archives
GMDSS
MT Archive
TCWC Wellington

JTWC:

ABPW10
AUS Cyclone 1 \\ AUS Cyclone 2 \\ AUS Cyclone 3 \\ SPAC Cyclone 1 \\ SPAC Cyclone 2 \\ SPAC Cyclone 3
Best track
Archives

Recent subtropical cyclone off the coast of Chile

This week, there was a subtropical cyclones off the coast of Chile in the south eastern Pacific Ocean (mentioned in various locations online). I wonder, are there any reliable sources mentioning this storm, so we could add it to the other storms section? Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 17:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We might be able to,@Hurricanehink mobile: this [1] discussion from Noaa directly mentions the subtropical cyclone, and was released around the same time it was either active, or had just dissipated. I haven't seen many other sources yet, but this is the most official one I've seen so far. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 17:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am opposed to adding subtropical systems into this article until such a time as the FMS/BoM and MetService recognise that subtropical cyclones that develop between 160E and 120W are a part of the TC season.Jason Rees (talk) 16:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Surely a reputable agency recognizing them counts at least for unofficial purposes? I reverted your removal of information as I feel there is a larger discussion at hand. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 17:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The FMS/BoM and MetService are all reputable agencies and recognise subtropical cyclones, but they are not counted towards the season totals or added the season articles. As a result, I do not see why we should add them in when they occur between 120 and the Americas, based on a completley unofficial source.Jason Rees (talk) 17:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's why we have an "other storms" section. Just because an agency didn't recognize it, doesn't mean it didn't exist. It is better to be thorough and include potentially borderline storms. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I don't agree with adding in subtropical cyclones into this basin when the RSMC's responsible for the basin, do not consider them a part of the TC season by assigning them F or U numbers. As a result, I strongly feel we should the tropical cyclone season to just tropical systems.Jason Rees (talk) 19:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter if it's RSMC or not, See Subtropical Cyclone Katie, Subtropical Cyclone Lexi and South Atlantic tropical cyclone are there in Wikipedia and which those are not from RSMC's ElenaCyclone (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ElenaCyclone: It does matter that we are including subtropical systems that just happen to form to the west of 120W, when we wouldn't include them to the east because the RSMC/TCWC's do not include them as a part of the season by assigning them a U or F number. I would also suggest that we remove Lexi and Katie from the SPAC seasons for the same reason.Jason Rees (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we should be including all of these subtropical cyclones, particularly the ones forming beyond the official boundaries of the basin. The official RSMC of the basin may not recognize them, but we've included plenty of storms on other season articles in which the official RSMC of the basin did not recognize the said storm (mostly on WPAC articles). We also included Stephanie in the 2016 Atlantic hurricane season, which the NHC did not recognize at all, but Meteo-France did (the NHC said that Stephanie was extratropical, while Meteo-France said it was subtropical). I don't see why the SHEM season articles should be any different. Katie and Lexi may not have been recognized by the official RSMC, but they were noted by researchers and the NOAA and NASA (both of which are Government agencies). This new subtropical cyclone was noted by the Weather Prediction Center, which is a Government agency. I believe that the solution isn't to remove these unofficial storms, but to increase our coverage of them overall. I would consider adding other documented subtropical cyclones for the other SHEM articles as well, especially those that were recognized by at least one other Government agency. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 06:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@LightandDark2000: We are in the position where the RSMCs (FMS/BoM/MetService) of the basin does recognise them, but does not consider them a part of the tropical cyclone season. As a result, I do not see why we need to document them and in effect commit original research by saying that they were a part of the season even if they do not count towards the totals or are we now going to start including all tropical disturbances.Jason Rees (talk) 12:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If they aren't going to be included on the season articles since they aren't officially recognized by the RSMC of the basin, I suggest we create an article solely dedicated to the rare systems, like South Atlantic tropical cyclone. It is worth noting in that article that systems that aren't officially noticed by the the main RSMC (the Brazilian Navy) still have their own sections, since at least some government agency issued bulletins or noted its existence, with the most recent case being that of Tropical Storm 01Q. I also noticed that on the article Mediterranean tropical-like cyclone, it talks about how they are not officially considered tropical cyclones, and how the Mediterranean is not officially monitored by any agency with meteorological tasks. However, we still have many systems mentioned with their own sections, since regional agencies like HNMS and Noaa and many others still produce bulletins and/or track the storms. As it is, I understand Jason Rees' position above in the case of removing the systems from the article, however I still feel that these other cyclones should have at least some place where they can be properly noted, as we have done before with other odd systems. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 05:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree they should be noted somewhere, and I think that the SPAC article is the best place for them. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with noting unofficial tropical cyclones that occur outside of the basin, but strongly disagree with subtropical cyclones being noted within the article when the RSMCs for the basin do not monitor them as a part of the tropical cyclone season. A good example of this is the subtropical low that exists of the coast of New Zealand at the moment another is the BoM changing their definition to remove subtropical cyclones in 1978. I also suspect that there are more subtropical cyclones out there then we are aware of, for example, TC Martin managed to get to 110W before it dissipated officially it was extratropical but i would not be surprised if it was subtropical. As a result, the rarity argument doesn't wash with me.Jason Rees (talk) 16:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really support noting them in the article, which is why I proposed that we create a separate article for the systems. I will say though that even if there have been more systems than we are aware of, only a few have actually been tracked and labeled in anyway, including the most recent example, where it was noted by the WPC. I will say however that with the reasoning current reasoning we will also be removing such systems such as Subtropical Storm 96C, and 2006 Central Pacific cyclone from their respective articles, since they weren't officially included in the CPHC or the NHC databases, despite other agencies having tracked them in some regard, similar to the case of Lexi and Katie. I think this is something that extends way further out than just this article, and it is becoming more clear to me at least that we need more eyes and ore opinions to help settle the disagreement. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 04:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@CycloneFootball71: I don't think we need to be including these subtropical systems full stop, unless they are either considered to be tropical by an agency or counted as a part of the season like in the Atlantic and the SWIO. This is because subtropical cyclones are these days monitored, tracked and labelled as subtropical systems, where appropriate by the weather service but are not counted towards the cyclone season. I also wonder where we would draw the line if we included all of these subtropical cyclones and if the WPC bulletins in this case are really a reliable source when they originate from the training desks. Jason Rees (talk) 00:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It would be against Wikipedia's policies not to include this storm, if not in the "Other systems" section, in a different article such as Southeast Pacific tropical cyclone. Katie and Lexi are mentioned in their respective Other systems sections, why not this storm in its section? 🐔dat (talk) 11:26, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No it wouldn't be against Wikipedia's policies not to include this storm, when subtropical storms are monitored but not considered a part of the season by the BoM/FMS/Met Service.Jason Rees (talk) 11:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Every storm in any Other systems section is either an extremely minor disturbance or an unofficial storm. Are you suggesting all unofficial storms are removed from Wikipedia? 🐔dat (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am well aware of what an other systems is for but do not see the need for it in this article yet, when all of the systems have been notable and have more than enough information to justify a section. As for unofficial systems, I am not suggesting that all unofficial storms are removed from Wikipedia, but that this subtropical storm should not be included in this article when subtropical storms are monitored but not considered a part of the cyclone season by the BoM/FMS/Met Service - the RSMC/TCWC for the basin. Jason Rees (talk) 11:37, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will repeat a previous comment of mine: Katie and Lexi are mentioned in their respective seasons, why not this one? It should be all of them included or none included. Additionally, a government agency (NOAA) did report the storm, as mentioned above. 🐔dat (talk) 11:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chicdat: I personally feel that both Katie and Lexi need to be removed as they were not considered to be tropical cyclones as far as I know. Also just because this system was monitored by a government agency, it does not mean that we should include it when the BoM/FMS/Met Service which are also government agencies monitor subtropical cyclones, but do not consider them a part of the cyclone season.Jason Rees (talk) 12:04, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see. 🐔dat (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This subtropical cyclone may best be noted as an "other system" that appeared outside of the bounds of the basin. I think it would be best discussed as something to add to the "Tropical Cyclones in 2022" page instead, where a complete picture of global (sub)tropical cyclone activity should be chronicled despite any human or political boundaries as, clearly, weather does not care for our neat numbers and straight lines. ZachJGWebb (talk) 17:12, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ZachJGWebb: It would be great if we could monitor all of the subtropical cyclones around the world as a part of the tropical cyclone season. However, the warning centres routinely monitor subtropical cyclones, but do not count them as a part of the cyclone season, unless they are a former tropical cyclone. As a result, it would be original research to include them all in the relevant cyclone season when they are not counted as a part of them.Jason Rees (talk) 15:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest creating a page titled Southeast Pacific tropical cyclone and include TD 1983, Katie, Lexi, Humberto and most recently Yaku to this page. It would be a waste to get rid of them when the wiki is where history is saved for future generations to learn from. Vệ Thần - Talk 05:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We need a Dovi article

I think we need an article for Severe Tropical Cyclone Dovi!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.118.241 (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If/when it hits New Zealand, it will get an article. 🐔dat (talk) 11:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I made Cyclone Dovi draft Draft:Cyclone Dovi, you are welcome to improve. thank you HurricaneEdgar 11:24, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! We got one!

Cyclone Dovi's Scale

Has anyone realized how inconsistent it's scale is? How is it a "Category 4 Severe Tropical Cyclone" when it's most likely, at best, a "Category 3 Severe Tropical Cyclone"? - Mobius Gerig (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mobius Gerig: Dovi is considered a category 4 severe tropical cyclone because the Fiji Meteorological Service and New Zealand Metservice assessed that it had windspeeds of 95 knots which makes it a Cat 4. Jason Rees (talk) 11:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: I'm not concerned with the scale that FMS gave it, it's the comparison for it, as, in terms of the SSHWS scale, is a Category 1 Tropical cyclone, which has a range from 56 - 72 knots, which is lower than a Category 4 Severe Tropical Cyclone, which has a range from 86 - 107 knots (which would make the storm comparable from a high-end Cat. 3 Tropical Cyclone to a low-end Cat. 4 Tropical Cyclone.) - Mobius Gerig (talk) 01:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mobius Gerig: The FMS and MetService analyzed Dovi as 95 knots (cat4), while the JTWC only put it at 80 knots (cat1). -322UbnBr2 (Talk | Contributions | Actions) 23:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly the BoM who were also in warning on Dovi due to it being a threat to Norfolk Island & in their marine AOR went for 85 knots. It will be interesting to see what BT brings us.Jason Rees (talk) 01:10, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Unbinilium-322 Dibromide: So it's disputed? Mobius Gerig (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mobius Gerig: Yes. -322UbnBr2 (Talk | Contributions | Actions) 22:23, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mobius Gerig and Unbinilium-322 Dibromide: Not really. The 10 knot diffence between Wellington and the BoM is nothing to write home about, since its just a difference of opinon/different techniques. The 15 knots between Wellington/JTWC is unusual esepcailly since 1-min winds are meant to be higher than 10, but no doubt both of these disputes will be dealt with in BT.Jason Rees (talk) 13:27, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneEdgar Is it deleted? I can’t find it. 115.96.79.11 (talk) 18:18, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneEdgar Is it deleted? 115.96.79.11 (talk) 18:19, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By the look of things, the overall scale was deleted, as it contain inaccuracies (as far as I know.) Mobius Gerig (talk) 20:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclone Fili

My edit was reversed as they argued that the cyclone is not in Australia's area of ​​responsibility. I did not write this. What I posted here is that the cyclone was close to the boundary of the two areas, not that he was inside it. It seems that the translation I made from Portuguese to English hinted at this. If possible, can you republish the information in more detail? I'm not fluent in English and I'm just a participant in the project. André L P Souza (talk) 20:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@André L P Souza: Without wishing to exert ownership over the article, I would say that there isn't really any need to include any information on Fili from the BoM at the moment. This is because the BoM are not talking about the system apart from a generic statement to say that Fili exists in the Coral Sea. The information that needs to be added to the article about Fili should come from the Fiji/Vanuatu Meteorological Services, JTWC and Meteo France.Jason Rees (talk) 21:15, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jason Rees: I tried to save Fiji's storm information to archive pages but I couldn't. There appears to be an error in the layout of the Government website. What do I do to disclose such information here? André L P Souza (talk) 21:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to use NOAA's links and the internet archive to archive Fiji's products, but am in the process of checking out an archive from the FMS.Jason Rees (talk) 22:00, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gina and Dovi page

Because they both caused a lot of damage in their time, I think they both need a page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hurricane Su (talk • contribs) 14:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Dovi getting an article but we need to see what comes out in the wash before Gina gets one. After all it has only just finished impacting Vanuatu. Jason Rees (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tracks after extratropical transition

I noticed that the separate image tracks for Cody and Dovi include their path after they transitioned to extratropical cyclones, but the combined season image at the top of the article does not have these parts of the tracks included. In addition, the path of Fili past New Zealand has not been shown on either image. Can we update these images to include these sections of the tracks please.Maple Doctor (talk) 06:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Supportstorm and Meow:.Jason Rees (talk) 13:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It should be easier for me to update the seasonal map if @Supportstorm can add the codes to each individual track as well.  🐱💬 14:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Meow Looks like an updated track is available in SPEArTC if you want to use that instead. I'll update it later if you haven't by then. Supportstorm (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I can’t access the SPEArTC website. There’s only ‘Not Found’.  🐱💬 13:48, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Insert cricket sounds) Maple Doctor (talk) 04:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've been a little busy. I already updated the individual tracks with the new data, but I can update the season summary here soon. Supportstorm (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Subtropical cyclone 96P in 2021–22 South Pacific cyclone season

I noticed that this storm disappeared in the article for unknown reasons, including in the other storm title. Vệ Thần - Talk

Without looking into the system, I notice that its called 96C which means that it wouldn't really belong on this article but on the EPAC article.Jason Rees (talk) 12:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think they were talking about a track map file labeled as TL 96P, which is mentioned nowhere in the article and is unsourced where it occurs on other wikis. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 19:24, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, i'm wrong, it's 96P, not 96C. Don't know why it disappear. Vệ Thần - Talk 11:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2021–22_South_Pacific_cyclone_season&oldid=1196901853"