Talk:Cape Verde hurricane

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Africa: Cape Verde Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Cape Verde. Weather: Tropical Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).

From specifically which reference originates the sentence, "The five largest Atlantic tropical cyclones on record have been Cape Verde-type hurricanes."? It would be great if I could get this, as it will be helpful for my MS thesis. Thanks.

Timothy Chen Allen (talk) 19:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Better structure; more of a narrative thread uniting the article. Jdorje 20:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was given the impression that there is a distinct "Cape Verde season" in which CV cyclones are favored over storms that are formed near the Bahamas or the Gulf of Mexico, and it seems to "cut off" about mid-September. Is that the case? If so, it might be worthwhile to note the hurricanes that occurred the earliest and the latest within the Cape Verde season (for example Lili and Karl both were named on September 15th or later). 66.217.44.205 03:12, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been studying hurricanes for four years now and I've never heard of a "Cape Verde Season". They aren't as common in June and July as storms that form in the Gulf of Mexico or Caribbean, but that still doesn't suggest a "season". Toroca (talk) 18:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stressing this type as separate inplies that there are other types, but no mention is made of other types, not even references. CFLeon 21:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This type is only stressed because Cape Verde type storms tend to be among the strongest that form in any given season, because they have the longest period of time free from interaction with land. The ones that form off the coast of the US, or in the Gulf of Mexico, or in the Caribbean don't usually get referred to as a specific type of storm; Cape Verde type storms consistently do. Toroca (talk) 18:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with CFL on this one. Anointing one group of hurricanes as a "type" and giving it a name implies that there are other "type"s. If there are, they should be noted and links provided (and if there aren't, some explanation of this should be provided). Maybe Cape Verde storms are the strongest, but that's all the more reason to make the distinction between them and Antillean or Caribbean type storms (Can you tell I'm making up these names--'coz I don't know any others?). --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 16:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, uhm, "triple" that? Well, at the very least I second that. I'm curious as to what percentage of Hurricanes are Cape Verde-type, maybe this would be helpful in both listing the other types (as well as their percentage of occurrence as well) and, when cross-referenced with the list of notable Cape Verdes, show a certain tendency away from/propensity towards powerful storms. 24.3.14.157 (talk) 10:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll say it again, Cape Verde type hurricanes are the only type consistently named by forecasters. I don't care what the name implies, because it doesn't matter. Unless you can find a reliable source naming other types (which you won't, because no professional ever specifies other types in the Atlantic), it doesn't belong in this article. Your personal opinions about what the name implies are irrelevant when this is supposed to be an encycolpedic article. Articles on Wikipedia are not supposed to be based on personal opinion, they're supposed to be based on fact, and the fact is that Cape Verde types are the only ones consistently mentioned, and the only "type" of Atlantic storm recognized and defined by the NHC in their frequently asked questions. Toroca (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Are storms which originate as tropical waves forming near Cape Verde count as Cape Verde-type hurricanes like Felix (2007) or Dolly (2008), and what about storms that travel north like Vince or Epsilon of 2005, and why does this article associate only to hurricanes and not to tropical storms or depressions? Thanks. ~

Yes, typically if a storm does not form from a westward-moving tropical wave, it's not a Cape Verde type. Vince and Epsilon don't count for that. Also, tropical storms and depressions aren't mentioned because, honestly, no one cares about those this far from land. You don't see forecasters mentioning "Cape Verde type" in reference to a tropical storm except when making statements like "Tropical Storm So-and-So has the potential to develop into a powerful Cape Verde type hurricane." A Cape Verde type Tropical Storm is almost an oxymoron, because such a storm would be no more powerful than any other tropical storm. Cape Verde type hurricanes, on the other hand, tend to be among the strongest seen each season. Not always, mind you; years like 2005 would be notable exceptions since none of the three strongest storms that year was a Cape Verde hurricane. (Emily, however, the fourth strongest, was). So far this year, the strongest storm has been Hurricane Bertha, which reached Category Three. That storm was so far the only Cape Verde type hurricane this year, though it looks like the newly-designated Invest 97L may be the next one. Toroca (talk) 18:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. OK, but by the way Gustav is a cat. 4 now. It formed in the Caribbean but its precuror wave originated off the coast of Africa, and Katrina, Rita, and Wilma can all be traced back to Africa. Also, storms can track thousands of kilometres west and not form until the Caribbean, and also what about the fact that most waves off Africa that do form into storms have a good amount of lightning. Thanks. ~

U) 22:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

The general definition of a Cape Verde type hurricane is one that forms as a tropical storm near the Cape Verde islands, within 1000km or so, and then reaches hurricane strength before reaching the area of the Lesser Antilles. That cannot be said about any of the storms you've named. They can all be traced back to Africa because they all formed from tropical waves, as about 85% of Atlantic tropical cyclones do. That doesn't make them Cape Verde type hurricanes; they formed too far from the Cape Verde islands to qualify. Of this year's named storms so far, only Bertha and possibly Ike were Cape Verde type; I'd have to look to see exactly how far Ike was from the Cape Verdes when it formed to say for sure, because it was in the middle of the Atlantic. In 2005, only three named storms were Cape Verde type hurricanes. Emily, Irene, and Maria. If Lee and Zeta had reached hurricane strength, they might have qualified as well, though I'd doubt it in Zeta's case considering the track it took. Toroca (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Tropical Storm Josephine formed off of Cape Verde. But it dissipated in the middle of the Atlantic. Now they're saying it could regenerate as the remnants move into the Caribbean. Would it be called Josephine or Kyle? And if it does regenerate, do you think it could have enough time or enough gas in the tank to form into anything bad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.253.110 (talk) 13:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure Katia is a cape verde type... But can somebody make sure as it did form slightly west of cape verde? JohnnyRH (talk) 22:30, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion there is a lot of variation in what is labeled as a Cape Verde storm. The region of development is open to discussion. Even the NHC's FAQ has a statement that "that would be my definition, there may be others"[1] when trying to pin down whether a storm is or is not a Cape Verde type. Using a fairly loose or broad definition, the tracks of some storms might pass the Cape Verde Islands prior to development. The question open to debate is where must development take place and to what extent should this development be for it to "qualify." So I would offer up my "definition" for the purposes of this article, and the article's discussion of tracks.

I noticed that in at least the case of Hurricane Gilbert, that the moment of development of that storm does not fit the typical definition of a Cape Verde hurricane. But suspend disbelief for just a moment and consider what the article's emphasis is. In this particular case, we are discussing tracks that are typical of Cape Verde hurricanes. Gilbert definitely fits this constraint perfectly. Not only did the "tropical wave" leave Africa and pass by Cape Verde, its track continued to follow the quite horrific southern route that wreaks so much havoc. But it was only a "disturbance" or "wave" when it was in the Eastern Atlantic. So while not a textbook case, this hurricane met all of the criteria for a Cape Verde storm except that its development was to far west. Notably, though, it was a hurricane before approaching the Lesser Antilles.

In summary, the track of Gilbert from its genesis in Africa was similar to a Cape Verde hurricane, and thus it would serve as a good example of one on the southern track. I have a feeling that what prevents such tropical waves from developing in the Eastern Atlantic might often be their proximity to the equator's

The Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorology Lab (AOML) Hurricane Research Division (HRD) defines a Cape Verde-type hurricane as one that develops within 600 miles of the Cape Verde Islands, as your source states. Becoming a hurricane prior to the Caribbean is not the set definition, just his own.

(talk) 16:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

----

The recent edits have produced a new section for "famous" Cape Verde storms. Is this some kind of popularity contest for storms? Don't get me wrong, I think a few of the major storms in the old list were of little noteworthiness, but the current list is problematic. The list of "famous" ones is essentially going to face an influx of opinions based on severity, casualties, intensity, retired names, local fame, and the costly nature of the storms listed. But we already have most of those lists... A list of popular Cape Verde hurricanes? Well-known? How about we just list the significant ones? The list at first blush seems to remove a lot of interesting cases, including the ones which made landfall in Canada and other non-U.S. territories. And by the way, Hurricane Jeanne should be removed as it was not a great example of one, depending on your definition.

The other situation is the cut-and-paste quote from Landsea about the definition of the Cape Verde storm. As I pointed out a few years ago (on this page) and has been consensus for some time, the definition is flexible and somewhat vague in many people's minds. Landsea's strict definition of a Cape Verde hurricane has NOT been adopted by consensus, neither in the scientific community nor here. So while I don't contest Hurricane Jeanne being listed, I believe that others (like Landsea) would. So I propose removing Landsea's quote and replacing it with language that permits a flexible definition (without arbitrary hard-and-fast latitude and longitude rules). And I propose de-listing Hurricane Jeanne in the popularity contest list due to it not fitting the ideal, technical, strict definition of a Cape Verde storm... it formed pretty far west.

I also contend that since this is an article meant for non-technical readers, we try to use the year in parentheses to distinguish even famous hurricanes, like Gilbert (1988) along with the wikilink in most cases. We typically will only mention a storm once or maybe twice with the exception of the the storms chosen to show up as an exemplary track.... like Allen, Georges, Gloria, Edouard.

As for the removal of the #5 track, how did this track detract from the article? (It was there for 3 years or so.) After all, storms of this nature do meet the definition of Landsea and others for a Cape Verde hurricane... they simply do not track westward for very long, if at all. This track also serves to explain the tropical ridge a little better. My reason for the #5 track is simple: each track was supposed to get further and further north and away from North American landfall, this being the case of essentially no chance at landfall. This probably happens a lot during Atlantic multidecadal oscillation cold phases... like in 1979. I like to saw logs! (talk) 07:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made the most recent changes to that "Famous" section, and 99% of that change consisted of making it much shorter. Previously, the section title was "Major" (instead of "Famous", which I stipulate may not be ideal), leading to a mile long list in which every trivial, non-consequential Cat-3-for-a-second storm was being added. Example, this year's Hurricane Danny, which was briefly a major hurricane, then quickly died. As far as arguments about the nature of what constitutes a CV storm, if it's still up-for-debate in the meteorological community (where my impression is that at worst it amounts to a "mountainous molehill" type of quibble), then that can be noted in the article. (There are borderline or transitional cases in all hurricane categories: annular, subtropical, etc.)

I have no objection to changing the Landsea ref to something else. (In fact, since they're one of the few users of "Cope Verde-type", and I was just recommending a page move away from that wording, it wouldn't bother me at all.)

Regards Hurricane Jeanne, it killed over 3,000 people in the Greater Antilles (making it the second deadliest hurricane of the last half-century).--Froglich (talk) 23:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To revisit the discussion from 2008, are there now names for other "types" or Atlantic-basin tropical cyclones? I live on the west coast of Florida, and frequently hear meteorologists talk about early- and late-season storms that form in the Bay of Campeche. Such storm are (apparently) more likely to to have significant impact here since they can roar across the warm Gulf undiminished whilst Cape-Verde types have to either weave their way through the landforms of the Caribbean or lose strength as they cross the Florida peninsula. Myth or fact, is there a way to craft and encyclopaedic article about non-CV storms? PS: If there is not and this is the only "type", why is it not section of the overall tropical cyclone article? Kevin posting from non-logged in device. 159.53.174.140 (talk) 17:02, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cape Verde hurricane. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040703015516/http://www.accd.edu:80/sac/earthsci/sgirhard/1370.090/chap5.htm to http://www.accd.edu/sac/earthsci/sgirhard/1370.090/chap5.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

This message was posted before February 2018.

• 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) 15:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was started in 2004 up until last year (when an editor section-blanked), this article has had a section devoted to a list of representative storms. In 2015, noting that the list was becoming bloated as some sought to include every Cape Verde hurricane that had achieved cat-3 "Major" status regardless of whether the storm had approached land or was notable enough for an independent article, I undertook to trim the less notable storms. Since intensity was less useful an indicator of noteworthiness than impact upon humanity, in September 2015 I chose the word "significant" (over "famous", "noteworthy" or similar synonyms) after prompting from user Auree on my user talk page. There was no apparent dissent, and the section remained until is was summarily deleted on 21 July 2016‎.

I attempted to restore the section the other day, and was reverted by the editor who originally removed the section.

So, I bring it up for discussion: would the article be usefully served with a list of representative storms?--Froglich (talk) 06:42, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As the one who removed the section, I still oppose its addition. The storms whose tracks are mentioned in the tracks section suffice for the purpose of listing examples. We should not do more than that, because a.There is no

original research and therefore something we should minimize.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

If your argument is that "Cape Verde" classifications in and of themselves constitute OR, then you should submit the article for deletion based on those grounds (I think you know that that will not happen). As regards to whether or not any particular storm meets the classification, if it's blue-linked with its own article with RS describing it as CV, that should be more than sufficient to avoid claims of OR.--Froglich (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then at the minimum, the list needs to be trimmed to only those storms which reliable sources clearly classify as Cape Verde. For example, the 1926 Miami hurricane's article has no sources to that effect. Even then, I don't see what use this list serves. As I said, the examples cited in the tracks section should be more than enough to give representatives.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Upon tossing "cape verde" and "1926 Miami hurricane" at Google, the very first return on the page was to a National Weather Service page entitled "Great Miami Hurricane of 1926", which contained (and this quote was front and center in the Google returns): "...The Great Miami Hurricane of 1926 was of classic Cape Verde origin....". So, that's one storm you brought up as an example of lacking reliable sources which took me all of ten seconds to determine that sterling RS existed. But even if it hadn't, if wouldn't justify blanking the entire section replete with notable cyclones. Unless you can find another detractor to cast a !vote, I'm going to assume you're a lone dissenter and weigh that against a decade-long history of the article previously and continuously maintaining a list. (While your removal of the list has stood for nearly a year, I'm chalking that up to a dull 2016 season and subsequent diminished attention paid to various tropical topics; e.g., I only noticed the section's absence recently.)--Froglich (talk) 18:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is there is no precise definition of what is and is not a Cape verde hurricane, and I think a listing of storms that were actually defined as Cape Verde hurricanes, given the lack of precise definition falls under

^{Pacific Hurricane} 18:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

"The problem is there is no precise definition of what is and is not a Cape verde hurricane" -- It is not the job of Wikipedia to "settle" the "science". If, say, the National Weather Service or the National Hurricane Center categorize a storm as a Cape Verde type, then all that matters is that worthy RS exists. A list of such storms would be representative, not "loose".--Froglich (talk) 19:14, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have such a concise list of such storms that I can find.

^{Pacific Hurricane} 02:31, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Restore the list (i.e., revert Deng's section-blanking) and you'll have one. And if you think it's too lengthy to be "concise", lop off a few.--Froglich (talk) 04:14, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That list is not sourced, however.

^{Pacific Hurricane} 04:51, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

It's quite simple: For every blue-linked storm on that list whose article does not describe it as a CV storm, remove it. Of those that remain, if their article's CV claim lacks RS, 'cn' it. There is no requirement that a list of representative storms itself be listed externally anymore than, say, a list of "sports cars" would.--Froglich (talk) 05:01, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That list would be quite random though, given that, as I mentioned repeatedly, the term "Cape Verde hurricanes" has no precise definition and that term tends to be mentioned when there's little precise details on where the storm formed; the 1926 Miami hurricane referenced above for instance is explicitly mentioned as a Cape Verde hurricane, but Fred 15 is not despite the fact it hit Cape Verde.

^{Pacific Hurricane} 05:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

cn

}} is not a pass for adding dubious information.

I'm willing to change my mind if the NHC compiles a comprehensive list of such storms. But until then, sorry but no.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"...the term "Cape Verde hurricanes" has no precise definition..." -- Then your problem is with this article itself, not any list within it. Submit the article to AfD, fail, then back off. The National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center constitute authoritative RS for labeling various hurricanes of Cape Verde type, and nothing more is needed.--Froglich (talk) 07:28, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They label it as such, but we have no exact definition that I know of that says "a Cape Verde hurricane is a system that forms within X miles of Y". For that reason, a list of so-called "significant" Cape Verde storms, given the lack of the aforementioned definition, does not belong here.

^{Pacific Hurricane} 20:33, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

@Froglich: Uhm, no. The general concept is defined, it is just not well-defined enough for us to be compiling a list. And we certainly can't include every single storm the NHC has explicitly declared to be Cape Verde, so then where's the cutoff for the proposed listing? You won't find any natural one. There are various articles on things that are not well-defined (the unexpected hanging paradox being one), but one cannot reasonably expect to enumerate an ill-defined set. The distinction has to be made between a qualitative description, for which we have reliable sources, and a quantitative one suitable for creating a list. We have the former, which is well-sourced, but not the latter. If I were to have wanted the whole article deleted, then yes, I would've sent it to AfD. The fact that I did not should immediately suggest that there is more to my objection than anything along those lines.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:28, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"...And we certainly can't include every single storm the NHC has explicitly declared to be Cape Verde..." -- You're arguing a straw-man fallacy, as no one has suggested any such thing, and the article has never threatened to have any such thing in the past.--Froglich (talk) 08:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Froglich: Yet you suggested that "The National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center constitute authoritative RS for labeling various hurricanes of Cape Verde type, and nothing more is needed" (emphasis mine). This basically amounts to saying that it's a necessary and sufficient condition for including storms on the list. Judging from your opposition to including anything less than Category 4 hurricanes on the list, you surely will agree with me that we cannot literally have that situation. And in any case, this statement is a red herring. It remains that you cannot and will not find a natural, quantitative definition suitable for making a list in this article.--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:59, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Judging from your opposition to including anything less than Category 4 hurricanes on the list..." -- Nope, never said that. You're just makin' crap up now. (The list had *five* cat-3s in it.)--Froglich (talk) 05:38, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@

Either or both would be sufficient to contradict your earlier "and nothing more is needed". And in any case, this does not affect the fact that there exists no natural quantitative definition of what should and should not be in the list (which is not equivalent to being Cape Verde in general). Therefore, it stands that the list does not belong, and that you failed to make any convincing arguments otherwise. Erroneous nitpicking such as falsely accusing me of "makin' up crap" has no bearing on that.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:28, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

"You said above that you did not like the Cat 3's in the list..." -- Didn't say that either. I don't why this is so hard, when the actual text that I wrote is right up there. But anyway, we're clearly into the Moving Goalposts Fallacy area of diminishing returns here. (And there's no need to keeping 'pinging' me.)--Froglich (talk) 07:38, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was at the very least pretty implicit: "leading to a mile long list in which every trivial, non-consequential Cat-3-for-a-second storm was being added" along with your removal of Category 3 hurricanes from the list (before I removed the list entirely) seems pretty clear about implying it. And in any case, it doesn't seem like the case has been made for a list, so unless you have fresh ideas, the consensus will be against it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the Origin section, it says something about being within 10 to 15 degrees of longitude of the Cape Verde Islands, or within 6690 to 10,030 miles. I don't know the correct mileage numbers, but I do know those have to be wrong. 10,000 miles is almost have the circumference of the globe. 2607:FCC8:AD98:F200:CB2:B23A:3A26:FC9 (talk) 04:14, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The actual distance is one-tenth of this. At the latitude of Cape Verde (about 15 degrees) one degree of latitude is about cos(15 degrees) * (40000 km)/360 = 107.3 kilometers. Miclugo (talk) 02:31, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be reasonable to view Irma as the most notable example of a Cape Verde which follows the Caribbean track? BrendonTheWizard (talk) 19:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Irma based north of Puerto Rico and Hispaniola so I wouldn't consider it a classic Caribbean cruiser like Georges was.

^{Pacific Hurricane} 19:32, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't think Laura and Dorian were classic Cape Verde Hurricanes, they formed in the Central Atlantic, not close to the Cape Verde islands. Earl and Igor in 2010 were much more classic CV storms NSEasternShoreChemist, B.Sc.^{Questions/Comments?} 00:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]