Talk:Hurricane Isaac (2012)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Hurricane Isaac)

Metric system[edit]

I see wind speed is measured in knots in the US, which is the norm in many countries, but M/s (meters per second) is a more usual description given to measure wind speed in Europe, rather than km/h. I suggest changing to M/S. Jørgen88 (talk) 06:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The standard for the tropical cyclone project is to use mph (km/h) for US-based storms and km/h (mph) for all other storms. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 11:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Europe doesnt have too many hurricanes, anyway. And the rest of the world, including India, Australia, Japan, Philippines, China, and a lot of other eastern countries that have cyclones use km/h for measure speed whatsoever. So for US storms it is mph (km/h) and for the rest of the world it is km/h (mph). --Anirudh Emani (talk) 13:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we do have European windstorm though, the strongest one measured in my area was in 1992, coming from over the North Sea, with winds measuring 145 knots (75 m/s). I dont know if thats a storm or if its a hurricane, but it sure made a mess. In Scandinavia we use M/S though. example for weather forecast Jørgen88 (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weather forecasting is pretty cool in Europe. That, i have to agree. But the storms you have are extratropical cyclones. They aren't tropical cyclones and hence can't be called Hurricanes, even though they form in the Atlantic. The Tropical Cyclones WikiProject doesn't cover extratropical cyclones and i believe there is another project on such topics with partially/totally different set of rules. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is another project, and for more about that project, see here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Non-tropical storms. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:05, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Meteorological history – Storm path[edit]

Do you think the the storm path image in the Meteorological history section needs updating? How often is it supposed to be updated? –– 76.10.241.86 (talk) 17:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For active storms with articles, myself or Keith Edkins will update the tracks once a day. I'll have the newer version up shortly. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 18:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! –– 76.10.241.86 (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I think storm path is (again) in need of updating. Nikkywikky321 (talk) 02:56, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bulleted list..?[edit]

I noticed, the impact subsections of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama feature a bulleted list. Shouldn't it be in paragraphs..? and its written in active voice..! This is so messed up. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the bullet points, but someone keeps adding them back in. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Earthen Dam Failure[edit]

I included more information about the potential dam failure of an earthen dam on the Tangipahoa River that holds back Lake Tangipahoa. It wasn't a levee that breached. The dam suffered major damage due to heavy rains and may fail. Bdj95 (talk) 18:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Damage figure[edit]

I found this rescent news article on Isaac stating it did about 1.5 billion in damage. Could this be included for now? --Rye998 (talk) 19:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It says it "could" reach $1.5 billion, according to a disaster model. I think we should wait untli we get some better figures. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I think that's too low anyways. It'll take a bit longer to get the full damage figures out. --Rye998 (talk) 20:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yea. I think it's worth mentioning, but not as the official damage figure. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm not mistaken, isn't the damage figure used usually the insured damage times 2? I have seen that from the NHC in the past. --Lionheart Omega (talk) 18:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They do that for hurricanes and with winds, but Isaac caused mostly flooding, so the ratio is going to be off. If I recall correctly, most hurricane insurance doesn't cover storm surge, of flooding, one or the other. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with Forecast image[edit]

I write on 31 August and it is turning West, not East. Regardless - doesn't anyone think a forecast is a bit presumtive on Wikipedia? I know NOAA is a reputable source, but they can't even predict the weather three days from now. Is Wikipedia now open to all prognosticators? --96.244.244.244 (talk) 22:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where did the fatalities occur?[edit]

The introduction says: " Isaac passed over Hispaniola and Cuba as a strong tropical storm, killing at least 29 people", but when you check the details it says the 29 dead were in Haiti. So where did the fatalities occur? - if not in Cuba shouldn't the introduction be more specific?Ottawahitech (talk) 23:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Haiti is part of Hispaniola. 109.145.143.180 (talk) 01:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Laplace/St. John Parish not mentioned[edit]

There was a massive evacuation in Laplace and St. John Parish and there is no mention at all. I was there and I have uploaded photos. I am still evacuated and would greatly appreciate if someone else would take the lead on this. Laplace has never flooded and should have been safe, but the slow-moving storm dumped water on us for 3 days and the lake topped out.

  • Street in Laplace at 8am on 8/29
    Street in Laplace at 8am on 8/29
  • Same street at 11am
    Same street at 11am
  • My car being flooded at 6pm
    My car being flooded at 6pm
  • Taken from rescue boat around 6pm
    Taken from rescue boat around 6pm
  • From google:
http://www.nola.com/hurricane/index.ssf/2012/09/hurricane_isaac_curfew_to_be_e.html
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/national_world&id=8796036 Ottawahitech (talk) 16:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath - Laplace[edit]

Here are some pictures I took today when I met with the FEMA adjuster in in Laplace... for use whenever the aftermath section is built. I didn't stay long; the smell was unbelievable. Cheers! Stella BATPHONEGROOVES 01:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  • Front passenger floor board of my car is still waterlogged on 9/6/2012
    Front passenger floor board of my car is still waterlogged on 9/6/2012
  • Cleanup in Laplace, LA 9/6/2012
    Cleanup in Laplace, LA 9/6/2012
  • Cleanup in Laplace, LA 9/6/2012
    Cleanup in Laplace, LA 9/6/2012
  • Cleanup in Laplace, LA 9/6/2012
    Cleanup in Laplace, LA 9/6/2012

Puerto Rico[edit]

Why is Puerto Rico under the Lesser Antilles section? Puerto Rico is part of the Greater Antilles.

He:She[edit]

Can we remember that Hurricane Issac isnt a he please its an it.Jason Rees (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of a Split System, 2nd Hurricane?[edit]

Am I just not seeing it, or is there no mention of a second system formed from Isaac not mentioned in this article? I live in central Florida and I distinctly remember that a piece of Hurricane Isaac remained in the gulf and formed a second hurricane which then drifted towards Florida. I seem to remember it becoming another named storm. User Aidensdaddy2k9 10/26/2012 21:28 EST

The remnants split off and moved into the Gulf of Mexico, but it did not reform. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 01:31, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, thanks. And thanks for the quick response. I just came back to fix my signature, now that I finally got the hang of it. Aidensdaddy2k9 (talk) 01:54, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sections[edit]

I made a contribution that I had to undo because I did not see there were two state sections under "Preparations" and "Impact" I see this is somewhat the "normal" way it is presented. It sure seems the information would be better presented in consolidated sections that would include both preparations and impact for each area listed. It would make for easier reading altogether and especially if someone was just looking for information about a particular area.

  • Since I know changes are hard fought, not always to be won, and there would be considerable contentment from some, I just thought I would mention it. Otr500 (talk) 12:31, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unsupported content[edit]

I removed content that Gov. Jindal made a request from the Obama administration that was contrary to Federal law. The reference does not specify that the request was contrary to Federal law. In fact, the reference includes information that the Federal Government could provide exceptions for small, impoverished communities, which might provide more than the allowed 75/25% Federal aid. The reference provides; "We appreciate your response to our request and your approval," Jindal wrote. "However, the state's original request for federal assistance ... included a request for reimbursement for all emergency protective measures. The federal declaration of emergency only provides for direct federal assistance."

"Under law, the federal government can provide direct assistance at 75 percent of federal funding, with states responsible for 25 percent of costs, though there are exceptions for small, impoverished communities."

If someone wishes this information to be included please provide a source that would include information that the Governor's request was specifically contrary to Federal law, considering the exception, or reword the content to be aligned with the source. Otr500 (talk) 13:58, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement[edit]

Isaac didn't retire. But it caused around 30 deaths and over a 2 billion in damage, right?

In this case, you can argue it was forgotten in the wake of Sandy, although it made a name of itself as well. And yes, the former caused 41 deaths and $2.39 billion (2012 USD) losses, according to this page.

I keep forgetting about Sandy for some reason. In a normal season, I do believe Isaac would've retired.

RealSwany (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORUM.—CycloneIsaac (Talk) 19:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hurricane Isaac (2012). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:22, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Hurricane Isaac (2012). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 March 2018[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 23:42, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hurricane Isaac (2012) → Hurricane Isaac – May be a primary topic, due to its widespread damage in the US. It caused 41 deaths and more than $3 billion damage. Though Isaac in 2000 and 2006 were both hurricanes (with the former being a C4), none of them really had major land impacts. Unless 2018 gets an even bigger Isaac, I think 2012's reign should dominate this page title. B dash (talk) 07:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose none of the 3 Isaac's have major long term significance. Also worth nothing that Cyclone Isaac in the SHEM that I've seen listed as "Hurricane Isaac" as well, which actually did more long term damage. YE Pacific Hurricane 08:09, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Yellow Evan. A bigger worldwide view is needed to compared these storms before considering a requested move.Nova Crystallis (Talk) 20:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as well per the above. Fails WP:PRIMARYTOPIC because other then the damage it wasn't anything really record-breaking at all. --MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 12:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Rather minimal"?[edit]

I don't see any evidence supporting this in the rest of the article. -Snori (talk) 03:18, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally a look at the death/damage totals show me that it was a minimal tropical cyclone, however, I also recognise that it is POV and support its removal.Jason Rees (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category 1 hurricane?[edit]

I find it a little odd that our Infobox and Categories have this as a Category 1 hurricane, yet that terminology, or refs to back it up, don't appear in the body or the intro. Surely this should be mentioned somewhere under the "Meteorological history" section? - Snori (talk) 08:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I agree, and I made the appropriate changes. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merging of Effects of Hurricane Isaac in Florida and Effects of Hurricane Isaac in Louisiana[edit]

Even though Effects of Hurricane Isaac in Florida is a GA, the Louisiana one is not, and neither is the main Isaac article. Seeing how short the article is, and that both state articles have a background section, I believe both subarticles could be merged easily, and would improve the main article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Both of the two articles articles are substantial, and if merged here would make this article overly long. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The larger subarticle is around 23.8k bytes for prose and likely about 1.5k less than that if you remove the background which is described within the main article. The smaller subarticle would be about 13.5k bytes minus the background. The main article is about 26k bytes of prose which is not large. Accounting for duplicate content and the removal of backgrounds, I don't believe that the article would be too large per the guidance at WP:SIZERULE. Only at 8,000 words should an article even be considered for a split, even then it's not a certainty that it needs to occur.
Noah, BSBATalk 16:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hurricane_Isaac_(2012)&oldid=1222556419"