Talk:Tropical Storm Nadine (2024)

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 23 October 2024 by reviewer Tavantius (talk · contribs).

Weather: Tropical / Atlantic Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Atlantic hurricane work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Belize Low‑importance

	Belize portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belize, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belize on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelizeWikipedia:WikiProject BelizeTemplate:WikiProject BelizeBelize articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mexico Low‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tropical Storm Nadine (2024) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Impact

I believe that we should start on the impact section once publishers state what happened as it already made landfall. BoppySillyMcGoof (talk) 00:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That will undoubtedly happen (Sunday morning) once wind and rain impact reports are published by the media. Drdpw (talk) 01:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I mean... Do you want to start on it? BoppySillyMcGoof (talk) 01:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to start yet; be patient. Drdpw (talk) 01:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have a tendency to rush things as I get overexcited. BoppySillyMcGoof (talk) 01:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Under review!

I think that it’s sufficient enough to be an article right now. LemonJuiceIsSour (talk) 23:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty; I have to concur with @LemonJuiceIsSour. This certainly seems to be notable enough in my opinion; although whether or not it gets accepted by AfC I don’t know; there might still need to be some cleanup. But five people died; it made landfall with likely at least some damage. It would be notable enough by my books. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 02:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yay you agreed with me :)

Yes, it’s true that it needs some cleanup, but, overall, I think it’s good enough to be an article currently. LemonJuiceIsSour (talk) 02:25, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which; that said @LemonJuiceIsSour, I’m not an AFC reviewer; so I of course can’t accept it, and I can’t say for sure that it’ll be accepted. I am going to ping @Hurricanehink into this conversation though. Just to get a second opinion on whether or not it is notable enough. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 02:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well… the second opinion is kinda a moot point now. The AFC was accepted. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I took too long! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update – Sir MemeGod declined the draft on Kristy. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 17:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but he told me advice. I have one more try, until it’s over. 🍋 🍋(talk!) 17:08, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Kristy and Nadine

Consensus is to keep Nadine and Kristy separate. (non-admin closure) INeedSupport ^:3 16:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Kristy and Nadine are closely related tropical cyclones and neither would have an article too large as Kristy is a fish storm while Nadine was a weak tropical storm. However, they do bring their own information to the table: Nadine gives Kristy a history while Kristy would expand meteorological history. (Pinging @Drdpw, @Jasper Deng, and @JayTee32 due to involvement on discussion at the wikiproject) ✶Qux yz ✶ 01:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would still prefer that Kristy gets its own article as readers are unlikely to be interested in both at once.--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Support, as you can't tell the story of either storm without the other. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you can, there are plenty of systems like Kristy and Nadine that don't share the same article even when one's remnants led to the formation of the other, and that's the only connection they share with each other unlike systems like Amanda and Cristobal, for example, that shared other aspects as well like region impacted and damages caused. ABC paulista (talk) 03:27, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slight Oppose, I'd prefer that each system to be contained in their own spaces, but I don't mind much about the merging as long as we make it clear that they aren't officially considered to be the same system. ABC paulista (talk) 03:53, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, Kristy is not going to have an impact on land so it’s unnecessary to include it with Nadine even if they have a shared meteorological history. I think we just need to leave Nadine and Kristy separately.IrishSurfer21 (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - MarioProtIV lays it out perfectly, these are 2 separate storms so there should be 2 separate articles. If the system was considered the same storm the NHC would've continued to call it Nadine. 2600:1702:3EA0:D570:5073:CDBF:AB09:2CFE (talk) 18:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - While Kristy did form mainly from the remnants of Nadine, they are both completely different when you exclude the fact the Kristy formed off the remnants of Nadine. Take Hurricane Jova (2023) as an example. while It did almost no damage, it was a category 5 and that’s why it has a page. A category 5 like Kristy should have its own article. A short lived Atlantic tropical storm that impacted Belize should not be merged with the safe article as an eastern pacific category 5. Kristy and Nadine should be 2 different articles, however, another option is to have 2 separate articles for the storms, but have a third article which talks about both storms. JAFactsDude (talk) 18:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion regarding this on the project page: WT:WPTC#Does being a Category 5 Pacific hurricane establish notability?. ✶Qux yz ✶ 18:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - These are two different types of storms, even though Nadine became Kristy - Nadine affected Central America and Belize as a weak tropical storm, but Kristy has peaked as a Category 5 and is not expected to affect any land.

However, they are the same storm technically… AwesomeAndEpicGamer (talk) 02:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am changing my vote to Support after reading the discussion desc — merging the two in one could make the article bigger and more interesting.

AwesomeAndEpicGamer (talk) 02:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't considered the same system since by NHC since they stated that Nadine's LLC dissipated over land prior to its crossing, and on a later outlook the stated that the low that became Kristy is partially related to Nadine's remnants. Both indicate indirect connections, not direct ones. ABC paulista (talk) 03:35, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This point exactly. MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 04:06, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Numerous media reports directly connect the remnants of Nadine with the formation of Kristy; official season summaries and TCRs likely will as well, I'm sure. A combined Nadine–Kristy article would have notability, and a depth that the Nadine article lacks due to its small-scale infrastructure impact, and a separate Kristy article would lack due to it being a Category 5 fish storm without any records or land affects. Drdpw (talk) 02:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously doubt it. They don't consider official crossovers in systems which the low-level circulation dissipated during the crossing, and since they stated that Nadine's dissipated before redeveloping into Kristy, unless they state that the surface circulation actually survived crossing into the Pacific, they'll most likely be treated as distinct systems and their BT points will be disconnected from each other, like the disconnection that happened between Amanda and Cristobal's lives during operational and best track datas. ABC paulista (talk) 03:49, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – This is a vastly different situation then Amanda/Cristobal. Each are notable to their own and do not need to be mindlessly combined into one article. Amanda/Cristobal was because land impacts were too close together to distinctly seperate them enough. Here, Nadine and Kristy are two different sides of the same coin. If this thought process is what is being used, then we should merge every Atlantic to Pacific regeneration storm because of this. Cat 5 fishspinners particularly in the EPac can have all their content fit nicely within the season page itself. Also, as a note, the NHC did not even mention Nadine in their first advisory for Kristy, and even k the days leading up it was said a TC could form in parts due to Nadine’s remnants, not directly from the MLC. The BT have 2 TD points at the start is likely not correct either and someone probably left it in. Either way, from what we can gather, the explicit connection between the two has not been made official yet by a NHC TCR. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 04:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the TCR mentioned the connection, would you change to support? ✶Qux yz ✶ 12:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per MarioProtIV's reasons. Unless the TCR explicitly makes the connection between the two, they should be considered as two separate systems. If we use the original argument, wouldn't that also make the case for 11E and Milton to be merged (albeit a weak one), as 11E also gave it some history? Regards, 👦 06:56, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, two different tropical cyclones even if they are connected, and because I think Kristy shouldn't have its own article - at least while its notability remains indeterminate. Java Hurricane 07:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support they are the same system. 66.206.125.66 (talk) 11:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose your words, They are not the same system. LemonJuiceIsSour (talk) 12:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creator of both articles (whatever) I think that they should be merged overall - --LemonJuiceIsSour (talk) 12:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Put Support then if you agree with the idea. Insendieum ✉️ 13:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I agree with Hurricanehink here 🍋 🍋(talk!) 13:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. 🍋 🍋(talk!) 15:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LemonJuiceIsSour, for future reference, you are only supposed to !vote once. If you change your !vote, strikethrough earlier !vote(s). Drdpw (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oop then I won’t vote then until I figure this out so 🍋 🍋(talk!) 15:13, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LemonJuiceIsSour: to strike out: do <s>text that you want crossed out goes here</s>. Simple? Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 17:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok thx so much :) 🍋 🍋(talk!) 17:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose in absence of reliable sources explicitly confirming Kristy was a direct regeneration of Nadine. As pointed out above, NHC explicitly said Nadine's low-level circulation center dissipated over land (when the requirement for an Atl/EPac crossover is the LLCC surviving), and they indicated the low-pressure area that became Kristy was only partially related to Nadine's remnants. In NHC's last discussion on Nadine, they said they expected pre-Kristy to be a "new low pressure system" formed from "the combination of the remnants of Nadine and influences from a Gulf of Tehuantepec gap wind event"; there was also no mention of Nadine in NHC's first discussion on Kristy. This is enough evidence that NHC considers Kristy and Nadine to be separate systems, and on this encyclopedia we defer to what our reliable sources say. A sentence in this article like "Nadine's remnants later contributed to the formation of Category 5 Hurricane Kristy in the Northeastern Pacific" would suffice (no matter whether Kristy has its own article or not). ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 14:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral – They have had two separate names and are considered two separate storms, so I ain’t going to explicitly support this. But; I’ll go along if everyone else really wants it merged. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per above. It seems that the NHC has said that Kristy is only partially related to Nadine's remnants, and Kristy isn't going to affect land anyway. Shmego (talk) (contribs)
Oppose – In addition to what has been mentioned above, from the perspective of a disinterested general reader only interested in Tropical Storm Nadine's impacts, there would be a lot of extra prose not directly relevant to the subject matter. Furthermore, combining the storms into one article may give the impression that Nadine became a Category 5 hurricane, when this was only the case with Hurricane Kristy. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 18:39, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - We already have precedent for this (albeit in reverse): Tropical Storm Jova helped form Hurricane Franklin. The latter has an article, the former just a section in the overall season article. At most, I'd potentially support a hatnote in the relevant section on Hurricane Kristy estar8806 (talk) ★ 19:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, wasn't that the other way around though? Like Nadine this year (before Kristy), it was Franklin that formed first before Jova? Vida0007 (talk) 04:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Yeah no, this is not necessary at all. Nadine is the only storm here that needs an article to be honest, and adding Kristy to that would just make the page longer for no reason. If you want to merge these too, merge Grace and Marty 2021, Nana and Julio 2020. Sria-72 (talk) 23:41, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that’s an OSE argument, I think. 🍋 🍋(talk!) 23:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“If that is happening, then do that to these as well” kind of thing. 🍋 🍋(talk!) 23:45, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per ABC paulista et al. Two different systems. Merging would be unnecessary and slightly misleading for readers. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 25 October 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus on merge discussion is to keep Nadine and Kristy separate. Should another discussion about it arise and consensus is to merge them, then option 2 will be selected. (non-admin closure) INeedSupport ^:3 17:06, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Storm Nadine (2024) → ? – See the talk page for the context of this request and rationale. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 19:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What should the title of the merged article be called?

✶Qux yz ✶ 01:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 - "Tropical Storm Nadine and Hurricane Kristy" ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also Option 2 Drdpw (talk) 01:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 as names like these should always go in chronological order. Option 1 doesn't follow the rule, Option 3 only applies to crossovers that were renamed when they entered a different basin (e.g. Hurricane Joan–Miriam), and Option 4 is only used for tropical cyclones that did not originate from the same system (e.g. Cyclones Judy and Kevin). _ZZ^Z 'S 03:04, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 LemonJuiceIsSour (talk) 03:41, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2, per above. ABC paulista (talk) 03:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 just like above as Nadine formed before Kristy Crominance (talk) 11:07, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 – This makes more sense generally and there's 100% consensus on the 2nd option. SomeoneWiki04 (talk) 13:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2, per above Shmego2 (talk) 18:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 if the 2 articles become merged TyphoonSeason2024 (talk) 15:41, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second option — Tropical Storm Nadine and Hurricane Kristy (like with Amanda and Cristobal)

AwesomeAndEpicGamer (talk) 02:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second option looks to be the best, as it was Nadine that formed first. Vida0007 (talk) 03:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second option as I really want to avoid another Amanda/Cristobal type of debate Jay Tee⛈️ 04:57, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is merged; option 2 – per above. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Option 2 – per WP:CRITERIA and especially WP:CONSISTENT (cf. Tropical storms Amanda and Cristobal). Option 1 would break the consistency with the cited article title. Option 3 fails WP:PRECISION because it does not unambiguously define Nadine and Kristy to be two separate systems. Finally, Option 4 fails WP:NATURALNESS because tropical cyclones like Nadine and Kristy are more frequently called tropical storms or hurricanes. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 18:39, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Procedurally) oppose any move - I think it's very bad practice to open an RM on the condition of a certain result from a separate discussion, especially when that discussion seems to be leaning away from the certain result the RM is conditional on. estar8806 (talk) ★ 19:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda and Cristobal of 2020 have their own page, so I don't see why Nadine and Kristy couldn't as well Accordthemusician (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query regarding title renaming

If a consensus emerges to merge Tropical Storm Nadine and Hurricane Kristy's articles, should a move request be opened to further determine an appropriate article title? If so, I would be happy to initiate one. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 18:39, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I belove the above discussion functions as a move request. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. I have opened a formal move request. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 19:18, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the people oppose the merging of articles in the discussion above (which I agree with), I don't think a move request is necessary. 2001:480:200:3:65A3:E1B3:ED0E:5B8B (talk) 20:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.