Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:09, 5 September 2008

Template:Hurricane

Caribbean Unassessed Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Misplaced Pages visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A news item involving Hurricane Gustav was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 28 August 2008.

Archive of topics into September 1: Talk:Hurricane Gustav/Archive_1

Should the accident be included in the US deaths?

CNN and other news stations aren't including the accidents of the evacuees in Georgia in their US deaths counts. Should the accident really be included in the wikipedia count? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daanver (talk • contribs) 23:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes as indirect deaths. CrazyC83 (talk) 01:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Well - would these for unfortunate souls be in Georgia, if it wasn't for Gustav? Brudder Andrusha (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

They would not have died if it weren't for Gustav. CrazyC83 (talk) 17:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Re-calculating the death toll

Different sources have different numbers, but here is the complete list I have found (US only; the total of 95 in the Caribbean is accurate):

Direct deaths

• 1-2: Tree on house in Baton Rouge
• 3: Tree on house in Lafayette
• 4: Tree on trailer in Grant Parish
• 5-6: Tornado in Evangeline Parish

Indirect deaths

• 1-2-3: Hospice patient evacuations from Jefferson Parish
• 4-5-6: Hospice patient evacuations from Calcasieu Parish
• 7: Falling tree limb while preparing in St. Francisville
• 8: Electrocuted while fixing wires in Rapides Parish
• 9: Car crash on Gustav-soaked highways near Baton Rouge
• 10: Natural causes in Lafourche Parish
• 11-12-13-14: Car crash in Georgia while evacuating
• 15-16: Car crash in Mississippi while evacuating
• 17-18: Carbon monoxide poisoning in Calcasieu Parish
• 19: House fire in St. Martinsville

CrazyC83 (talk) 20:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Please be civil

02-Sep-2008: When I began adding text into the article, I did not realize that article "Hurricane Gustav" was being intensely edited according to severe attitudes about content: instead, I had imagined various text was being deleted (often) to shorten the article for more recent events. Now I understand that many contributions were being deliberated axed, with no consensus (mutual agreement) and certainly no prior, polite discussion. I'm not saying it is "wrong" to be rude or ruthless, but typically, articles are debated by ongoing discussions, over a period of days, to reach some common understanding of content. Sometimes, a rude or ruthless action could be used in times of emergency to correct a dire, severe crisis; however, Misplaced Pages ain't it. There is never a time in Misplaced Pages to be ruthless: the game isn't about facts, it's about how people treat each other in sharing information for general readers, not in dictating facts to the peasants. There isn't a wiki captive audience, forced to read whatever crap is mandated. Being rude or ruthless in Misplaced Pages is the ultimate failure, and people should probably go on break for 3 months, to contemplate why they acted so severe about a project that is a cultural-joke in America: a collection of half-baked articles with all kinds of wacko comments and vandalism that persists for months. You're not fooling people in America that being ruthless will make Misplaced Pages articles better and accurate. Numerous people have already left Misplaced Pages, in disgust about the treatment of people, terrified to see "You have messages" and fearing more judgmental wiki-puke vomited at them. However, I, for one, can handle the hate, ready for the stern behavior, but the long-term plan is WP:Civility, not severe attitudes. Thank you to everyone who can help restore civility among the few left in Misplaced Pages. Peace to you. -Wikid77 (talk) 11:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Your edits aren't being axed without comment. In fact, there are three topics on this talk page about your contributions (1,2,3), all of which show a consensus that they were "axed" appropriately. Nor are your edits being singled out—two of the aforementioned sections start with "I don't know who added this but...". There is no hate for you to handle; this is just how busy articles work. Also, take heed of the warning displayed on wikipedia's edit-screen: If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it. Plasticup /C 12:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• 04-Sep-2008: To User:Plasticup: Thank you for taking time to consider this issue. Please don't think I am blaming anyone about the situation: it is a systemic problem that affects everyone. I realize you are trying to be diplomatic, carefully considering the 3 issues above; however, I had downplayed the impact by not mentioning that I had made over 40 edits to "Hurricane Gustav" without complaint, because I realize hundreds of edits are often reverted: professional photographers have even reported some of their photos being incrementally deleted (elsewhere) in a similar, undiscussed manner. Quiet axing of content has been rampant across WP. After years of life in the "wiki-pit" I had begun to think of axed content as typical, but the issue of "WP:Civility" is a formal topic now. Thanks also for noting the old Misplaced Pages slogan of "edited mercilessly": I had not realized how out-of-date that wording compares to the newer policy of WP:CIVIL (in warning people to expect results "mercilessly" which does not quite fit with "civility"). Hence, the conflicting behaviors are a systemic problem across all contradictory aspects of Misplaced Pages, and that explains the "business as usual" attitude of merciless behavior: merciless is how Misplaced Pages began with a few, and now the horde expects "wikis behaving badly" as SOP, and thus many people quit WP in disgust. No one individual should be blamed for the hollow content and lack of articles about key subjects: for example, where is article "cogan grass" or "string grammar" or "GFDL hurricane model" or "systemic problem"? -Wikid77 (talk) 13:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

This page is for discussing changes to the article Hurricane Gustav. If you want to address a systemic problem at the very root of all wikipedia perhaps you should try WP:RfC. Plasticup /C 13:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

A couple preliminary rainfall totals added

There is an internal debate at HPC about whether to add once a day reports to the advisory or not, so the HPC advisory currently does not contain the maximum from Gustav. To work around this, I have added amounts directly from CoCoRaHS and the CPC daily rainfall collective that would otherwise have been the source of rainfall information in the HPC rainfall summaries, and my storm total worksheets. Hopefully, this issue will be resolved soon. Thegreatdr (talk) 13:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Gustav refugees

I'm OK but still in a shelter in Shreveport, Louisiana with 3000 or so others. We're awaiting a way back to New Orleans, Louisiana. The people running the shelter are doing a great job, imo. I'ld like to see where the other shelters are and see how people are returning to their homes in NOLA and other cities that were evacuated. • Q#o • 17:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

That's good that you're ok man. I had a friend who only goes by Firetears who is from NO and I haven't heard if he is alright or not74.196.134.34 (talk) 22:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• 04-Sep-2008: NOLA re-opened to residents at midnight, zero hour on 4-Sep-2008 (Thursday). Many were staying in nearby towns, such as Mobile (Alabama), which recovered from the downtown flooding faster. Widespread flooding and many trees were down all across the central Gulf Coast (but no source for that). Other readers have commented that they are reading "Hurricane Gustav" for all these details that would take hours of TV watching, or are not indexed by search engines (Google, Yahoo or MSN Search can find almost nothing about Gustav damage and evacuees returning: indexing current information is hampered by corrupt SEO spamming that hides ads as "news" data, so delaying news protects the search engines from predators). As writers, the details cannot be added into the article without mainstream sources (not blog references). Perhaps some Gustav blogs have the ability to search for "evacuees returning" to get timely info: meanwhile Misplaced Pages is struggling with policies to become a timely source, much faster or better focused than search-engines (but many people don't even want current films or singers detailed, due to severe opinions of notability). Every statement in the article might represent hours of edit-warring to include current info needed by actual readers, but thanks for letting us know that evacuee travels are a concern. -Wikid77 (talk) 13:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Locked

I vote that editing of this article be locked for now. Am I alone74.196.134.34 (talk) 22:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

i would dissagree there as this is no longer a major event & is most probbably within the next advisory goign to be downgraded to a low which would mean we can get rid of the Current tags and boxes and replace it with the normal infobox Jason Rees (talk) 01:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Gustav might be around as a TD for a while longer. But even still, there is no need to lock this page. Plasticup /C 01:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

The old NHC track is at least a day too slow already. Gustav, according to HPC, should become extratropical within 24 hours. Then again, until the low dissipates or moves out of North America, shouldn't we keep the status current? The flooding in portions of Louisiana and Arkansas is bound to last up to a week, regardless. Thegreatdr (talk) 03:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I have reached WP:3RR on this article trying to keep it listed as current, and many others have too. There are hordes of IPs, new users, and even old users who think that when the NHC stops monitoring a system it is automatically dead. Plasticup /C 04:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't help with the HPC advisories generally don't get read by the media...though I did notice they get read on XM radio on the Emergency Channel (247). You know, we changed these from storm summaries to public advisories just so they would get greater dissemination. I think they do, but the situation is only slightly better than it was in 2001. I don't think I've used any reverts as of yet (I changed the status once and no one changed it back.) Thegreatdr (talk) 04:58, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Gustav is still a TD

As of 11pm EDT, September 3, Gustav is still active. Just because the NHC has stopped monitoring the system does not mean it has dissipated! The Hydrometeorological Prediction Center is still tracking the tropical depression. Plasticup /C 03:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

That is correct, at least as of 4 am. It will be deemed "inactive" (although the effects will continue to be monitored) when the header changes from "Tropical Depression Gustav" to "Remnants of Gustav", at which point it either is extratropical or a remnant low. CrazyC83 (talk) 15:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

As of 1500 UTC the heading has been changed to Former Tropical Depression Gustav so we can now removed all the current storm info and add the infoboxes Jason Rees (talk) 15:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

That's odd. It's not even an option for the header. It is safest to wait. So the rule here is that if it becomes extratropical, even if there are still impact from the system across the Midwest, that it's no longer current? Thegreatdr (talk) 17:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd keep it as a current event and under Current-class until the impact dies down. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:04, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

It should probably stay as current for a couple more days while damage assements start coming in and the remaints start becoming less identifiable as Gustav. Jon (talk) 13:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Gustav's extratropical phase

Who is tracking it and where can I find information on it? HPC said

THIS IS THE LAST ADVISORY ISSUED FOR THE REMNANTS OF GUSTAV.

PLEASE REFER TO YOUR LOCAL NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE OFFICE FOR

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS SYSTEM.

...so where can I find its continued effects? Plasticup /C 14:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wait for the TCR, I guess. –Juliancolton 14:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

TCRs aren't very good with that sort of thing. They usually just end with "Gustav was absorbed by a cold front and lived happily ever after". No gritty details. Plasticup /C 14:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

try the Hurricane Local Statements issued by the relevant National Weather Service Weather Forecast Offices Jason Rees (talk) 17:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Hurricane_Gustav#Vessels_in_the_Industrial_Canal

95% of this is irrelevant. It could all be summed up with "two ships broke loose in the storm and crashed into a bridge". How is the ships long, boring, un-cited, and unconfirmed ownership history relevant to the storm? Plasticup /C 19:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Plasti -- strongly suggest you check your facts and add some citations/references... also you might want to check your global tv and print media for pictures of pileups of barges and vessels along with damaged new flood facilities.

"how is this relevant" to your financial interests? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluenorway (talk • contribs) 19:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• Unassessed Caribbean articles
• Low-importance Caribbean articles
• WikiProject Caribbean articles
• Misplaced Pages In the news articles