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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Do we have any proof that the designator BOB 04 was used, as this system is being decribed as a land depression rather than a Bay of Bengal system. If we dont id like to propose that we use Land Depresion 01 rather than BOB 04 since the IMD classify land differently to BOB systems.Jason Rees (talk) 10:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the system's actual name may be BOB 04, despite the lack of mention of that name. In the 2011 North Indian Ocean cyclone season, Land Depression 01 remained separate from the other storms, and the identifiers continued smoothly. However, in this cyclone season, there is BOB 03, a break, and then BOB 05, with Land Depression 01 in between. This leads me to believe that the storm's actual name may be BOB 04, so we might want to recheck sources and try to dig up the truth. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:04, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably related to the lack of editing activity within these pages. I do not know the real reasons, but the individual storm tracks have been updated. You can ask Cyclonebiskit or Keith Edkinds to update the summary track, but only after Helen dissipates. LightandDark2000 (talk) 02:18, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noticed that as well, which makes it all the more frustrating. However, there is a chance that the storms may actually be the same. But in case they aren't, I opened a discussion on Podul's talk page. You are more than welcome to take part in it. LightandDark2000 (talk) 02:16, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Turns out that they are separate systems. However, the 2 storms are still related, since the remnant energy of Podul resulted in the development of a new area of low pressure, which eventually became Cyclonic Storm Helen. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Will whoever the heck it is please stop adding in the crap from JTWC??! We all know that statistics from that agency are extremely unreliable, which is why we don't use them. If we did, we would already use it wherever possible instead of accurate data. You can ask Jason Rees, Cyclonebiskit, or any other users from their imput, but just stop adding in the crap! LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:55, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The reason that the JTWC is "avoided" is not necessarily that they are unreliable; rather, the IMD is the WMO-sanctioned warning center for the region. The JTWC shouldn't necessarily be removed from the article but the IMD should take precedence IMO. — Iune(talk)04:06, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 60 external links on 2013 North Indian Ocean cyclone season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
YAn editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have just modified 69 external links on 2013 North Indian Ocean cyclone season. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
