	Weather portal This template 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
	Tropical cyclones portal This template is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones.
	This template is supported by the Non-tropical storms task force.

Documentation moved to Template:Storm_colour/doc

Discussion

Nominating for deletion

I'm going to nominate the following orphaned templates for deletion at WP:TFD (barring any objections before I get to it). These were found using Special:Prefixindex (specifically, using this query).

Two of those, subtropical and extratropical, had already been orphaned. —Locke Cole • t • c 11:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

test of fallthrough

S: C0C0C0
catS: C0C0C0
STY: FF738A

should all give ff6699 _→AzaToth 15:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

weird colors

What are the STS and strong colors? In the track maps there are just 7 colors: depression, storm, cat1, cat2, cat3, cat4, cat5. I fear that adding other colors or finer levels of distinction will only add confusion by diluting the color associations. There are about 7 different types of gale (35-70 mph winds) but we don't have different colors for each of them. — jdorje (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The West Pacific uses a severe tropical storm designation (48-63 kts). Presumably it would be used in {{HurricaneActive}}; there is no need for it in the track map.--Nilfanion 23:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd really like to keep things simple for the color. Calling a storm a Severe Tropical Storm is a good thing but if the track map doesn't show it we shouldn't have a separate color for it. It should just use the TS or Cat1 color, depending on the wind speed. — jdorje (talk) 04:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Colors and accessibility guidelines

I recently fixed the colors in this template so that they were not in violation of WP:CONTRAST, but was reverted. Dark text on dark backgrounds is not readable to people with poor vision. If dark colors are preferred, it would be better to create a new set of templates that do not use the colors as a background for text. Kaldari (talk) 06:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason you were reverted was because i felt you needed to talk to the Project about the colours before you went and changed them, especially as the colours were spoken about a few years ago and i believe deliberately chosen to match the Saffir Simpson Hurricane Scale. I also believe that there was a major edit war over them before I joined the project in 2007/8.Jason Rees (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't change the hues, I just lightened some of them to be in compliance with WP:CONTRAST. The discussion you cited is from 7 years ago, before the accessibility guidelines even existed. Regardless, I will bring up the topic at WikiProject Tropical cyclones to see if anyone objects. Kaldari (talk) 01:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the change I would like to propose:

Old	F5	F4	F3	F2	F1	STS	DEP	UNK
New	F5	F4	F3	F2	F1	STS	DEP	UNK

As you can see, the F1 F5 color is the main one that needs to be changed. If you squint your eyes and look at all of the old colors, it is readily apparent that the F1 F5 text will be difficult to read for some people. Kaldari (talk) 02:19, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly see little difference, so I oppose, since that would require changing every single tropical cyclone track map worldwide. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:08, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This proposal is not related to track maps, only the colors used by this template. There would be no need to change anything else. Kaldari (talk) 03:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But if we were to change the 2000+ transclusions of this template, we would have to change the track maps to be consistent. I personally think the new Cat 5 colour doesnt work that well, while i think the new Cat 4 works well.Jason Rees (talk) 03:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why? The storm categories are still represented by the same hues, just slightly different brightnesses. And isn't it more important to make sure people have access to the text information rather than having the header color exactly match the color in the tracking map? Kaldari (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, keep in mind that compliance with the Manual of Style is required for Featured article candidates, of which, hurricanes are a common subject. Kaldari (talk) 03:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because I think the colour is too bright. Also I seriously doubt people will loose access to the text information represented by the cat 5 colour just because its "too dark".Jason Rees (talk) 03:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. United States Man (talk) 03:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Jason: I'm not sure if we're understanding each other. I'm saying that some people cannot read the text on the red background because the contrast between the background color and the text is not sufficient (according to the WCAG 2.0 contrast ratio formula). I'm not saying that they will lose access to the information represented by the cat 5 colour because it is too dark. Kaldari (talk) 04:38, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what you mean by the F1 color being hard to see. To me, the F2 color is harder to see. Anyway, I don't see enough of a difference to support this change, so I object as well. United States Man (talk) 03:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not the color, the text on top of the color. The difference is that it complies with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and our own guidelines. Kaldari (talk) 03:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my eyes may be different from your's because looking at the table, it looks like the F5 is hardest to see because red is the darkest color. United States Man (talk) 03:20, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I see that I wrote 'F1' instead of 'F5'. That was a typo. Sorry about that! Kaldari (talk) 03:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay. United States Man (talk) 03:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To make it more clear what the difference is, if you apply the WCAG 2.0 contrast ratio formula to the old colors and our text link colors, some of the old colors have a contrast ratio that is below the AA guidelines (the minimum required by our guidelines). I've simply brightened them to the point of passing the guidelines. Kaldari (talk) 03:30, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The color used for Category 5 looks very similar to the ones used for Typhoons, but they are not meant to be equivalent. Potapych (talk) 02:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative proposals

As there seems to be resistance to changing the colors of the template, I'll suggest some other ways that the problem can be solved:

Remove the header color from Infobox hurricanes – it isn't really needed since the text in the header tells you the category of the storm
Use the color as a border around the text or bar underneath the text, or show it in a box beside the text
Change the text and link colors for cat-5 headers – if the text were white and the links light yellow, it would probably have sufficient contrast
Increase the font size of the header to at least 18px

Any of these solutions should bring Infobox hurricane into compliance with WP:CONTRAST. Which of these solutions would be the best to implement? Kaldari (talk) 04:58, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think numbers 1 and 3 are ridiculous and 2 is not far from it. Not attacking Kaldari, but I really disagree with all of these. United States Man (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How would you suggest that we bring the infobox into compliance with WP:CONTRAST so that visually impaired readers can read the headers? Kaldari (talk) 05:21, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, although I did say that I disagreed with all of those, I guess number 4 is okay. Would you be willing to settle with that one? United States Man (talk) 05:24, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll accept any solution that can find consensus. Kaldari (talk) 05:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, as long as the others will hop on board it should be good. United States Man (talk) 05:29, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait... wait! I'm a member of the accessibility project. Kaldari made a mistake in the methodology for contrast evaluation. You see, the old algorithm for testing contrast was focused on color difference. It was difficult to comply to, and was abandoned in favor of the luminosity algorithm. You can see the difference for yourself at http://snook.ca/technical/colour_contrast/colour.html

If you enter "000000" (black) as a foreground color, and "FF6060" (red) as a background color, you will get the following results.

Old guideline: Color difference 447, success for the old W3C guideline is set at 500, while Hewlett-Packard set the threshold at 400. So the result indicated is "sort of compliant".
New guideline: The contrast ratio is 7.09:1, which is WCAG 2.0 AAA compliant. In short, it has the best score it could get.

There is no problem with the black text on the set of colors chosen in this template.

However, as you can see in Hurricane Hugo for example, links are often included in the header of the infobox. Foreground "0945AD" (blue links) on "FF6060" (red) fail to comply to WCAG 2.0 AA level. In conclusion, either the links have to be moved somewhere else in the infobox, either the set of colors will have to be changed indeed. I hope it helps. Dodoïste (talk) 12:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned above that I was using the link text color (#0645AD) as the basis for the contrast comparison, as all of the hurricane headers include a link. The replacement color I have proposed is the closest possible to the existing color that achieves the 4.5:1 contrast ratio (WCAG 2.0 AA) with both the text and link colors (it scores 4.51 to be exact). I'm not even proposing we try to meet the AAA level of compliance, only AA, which is relatively liberal. Kaldari (talk) 23:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we could live without the link to the scales in the infoboxes since its an overlink imo.Jason Rees (talk) 00:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaldari, you mentioned it only briefly in the last of your many comments. Why did you not made it explicit and clear for everyone? It seems to me that many were confused - me included.

@Jason Rees, yes, I believe this link is not necessary either. :-) Dodoïste (talk) 19:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be ok with taking out the link there, and ideally putting it somewhere else. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 20:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is generally assumed that wikitext can include links, but I guess I should have made this more clear. Kaldari (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 29 May 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Really outdated. You should change the wind speeds of the major hurricane categories. Category 4 needs its maximum wind speed upped by one. The Category 3 needs its maximum wind speed downed by one. The Category 5 needs its minimum winds upped by one. The Category 4 needs its minimum wind speed downed by obe. EpicBrutalGamer2009 (talk) 11:38, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. The documentation page is not protected. Go for it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:34, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question and issue.

as in storm template does this include Extratropical , Tornadoes and other storms? Gona need to make one for Tornadoes , using the hurricane scale for colors can be hard to tell from EF2 or EF3 or EF4 sometimes , would like to make a new Scale using Colors from Noaa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshoctober16 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 27 November 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

spdepression Typhoon2013 (talk) 05:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Typhoon2013 Sorry, I don't understand. Could you clarify your request? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:34, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:ProcrastinatingReader In the line of the spdepression|TD|low|TL , could we please add "sublow". Typhoon2013 (talk) 10:13, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see "sublow" at Tropical cyclone scales or Saffir–Simpson scale. Is there a source for the terms used in this template? – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:22, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: Not sure where this new term is coming from, so if that can be indicated (along with a specific X-to-Y change request) this can be better evaluated. Primefac (talk) 01:37, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 16 December 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Replace the entire page with:

{{#invoke:Tropical cyclone categories|color}}<noinclude>{{Documentation}}</noinclude>

Module:Tropical cyclone categories has existed for a while and is fully backwards-compatible with this template; see Module:Tropical cyclone categories#Compatibility. The module centralizes all tropical cyclone categories into one set of data, which should standardize all existing templates which are based on tropical cyclone categories. Chlod (say hi!) 17:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:43, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 4 February 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The scope of this template has expanded from tropical cyclone categories to include categories for more storm types (including tornadoes and winter storms). Please change the module invocation from #invoke:Tropical cyclone categories to #invoke:Storm categories. The former module now only exists as a temporary redirect following the module move. Chlod (say hi!) 23:06, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Jason Rees (talk) 23:43, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adjust purple color to conform to contrast standards

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi, I checked the color contrast of each of the colors listed here, and all but one – the purple color #C464D9 – passed both the WCAG AA and AAA levels. It is required to pass AA, and encouraged to pass AAA. Using the tool, I found a slightly different shade that will pass both levels: #CA73DD. Can this be updated? Thrakkx (talk) 12:47, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. Colors have been a topic of much contest. Please see WT:WPWX for the whole discussion. Chlod (say hi!) 08:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I realized in last hour, the categories colors changed.

Yesterday the colors were normal, whether traditional but now. I noticed that they changed something strange. They changed everything for some 'freak colors' that the truth was, it was me or I just visited the opposite encyclopedia. I found out it was true. Is it just a temporary test? Or will it stay permanently? МОДОКАУ 04:48, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These are permanent new colors based on discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/Color RfC. wxtrackercody (talk · contributions) 05:05, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PERMANENT!? NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! МОДОКАУ 09:35, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Color Change

I noticed that the colors got an overhaul (most notably Category 4 & 5) and I was just wondering why? Corgimations (talk) 08:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These are permanent new colors based on discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/Color RfC. I oppose that because it's freak and ridiculous for his change МОДОКАУ 09:36, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Modokai and Corgimations: The colour changes are not freaky or ridiculous, but needed to chnage in order to keep the project in line with Wikipedia's rules on accessibility. Basically the project had pandoras box opened for it and is stuck between a rock and a hard place as we needed to change them but knew that there would be a lot of opposition once we did so.Jason Rees (talk) 10:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense I suppose, although maybe we could change the tropical storm color to green? I feel like that would be a bit more noticeable. Corgimations (talk) 02:54, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possible new color change idea

Maybe we could make the colors more in line with the ones used on the YouTube channel “Force Thirteen“ by making tropical storms green, category fours scarlet and category fives raspberry-magenta? Who knows. Corgimations (talk) 08:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC) @Corgimations: You are more than welcome to propose a new colour scheme, but remember that the colours need to be accessible and be able to pass various tests.Jason Rees (talk) 10:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]