User talk:Uhdebbie

Howdy! Nothing much here right now.

December 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Cyclone Freddy, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. _ZZ^Z 'S 21:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source provided may not follow current guidelines (assuming you're correct), but it is official data. Per JTWC's latest Best Track for Freddy, released in early November, its ACE - at 83.31 - falls short of Ioke's "85.265". Freddy's track and page also needs to be change from its Operational data, to its Best Track (just like every other storm from my knowledge).

With this being said, how can we provide a proper source to Freddy's downgrade via latest Best Track, without directly sourcing the Track Data from Joint Typhoon Warning Center (JTWC) official page? Best Regards, Uhdebbie (talk) 22:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:OR and WP:REPUTABLE. Wikipedia articles cannot contain original thought without reliable sources. If no reliable sources state that Freddy is the second, it will still remain listed as the most ACE storm. HurricaneEdgar 22:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! So even if the official Best Track data had its peak hypothetical downgraded to a Tropical Depression - there for it didn't produce ACE - you'll still need a WP:REPUTABLE directly stating such? Indirectly, their data states it when calculating the Accumulated Cyclone Energy. The current information and track on the page is operational, and should fall under WP:OLDSOURCES from my knowledge (?) The 87.01 ACE generated by Freddy, once more, is from the old operational data; including the sources with mention of the record.

With that being said, I believe this should fall within the guidelines of a appropriate source directly stating such - "Analysing the atmospheric-oceanic conditions driving the sustained long track and intensity of Tropical Cyclone Freddy". Best Regards, Uhdebbie (talk) 23:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

Hello, I'm Donald Albury. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, 1851 Atlantic hurricane season, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Donald Albury 18:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]