Editing Talk:Tropical Storm Alma (section)

==Retirement record==
It says in the article that "Alma is the third tropical storm in the Eastern Pacific to be retired after Hazel of 1965 and Knut of 1987". I don't think those two storms count as retired names; they were removed from the list for unknown reasons. Alma is the 1st tropical storm in the East Pac. to be ''retired'', not removed for unknown reasons. Does anyone else agree about this? Was Alma the 1st one? [[Special:Contributions/76.235.197.175|76.235.197.175]] ([[User talk:76.235.197.175|talk]]) 22:01, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
:Agreed completely; I've temporarily commented out the sentence in question, pending further investigation. –'''[[User:Juliancolton|<span style="font-family:Script MT;color:#36648B">Juliancolton</span>]]'''&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;[[User_talk:Juliancolton|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:gray">''Talk''</span></sup>]] 04:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
::How about [[Hurricane Kenna|Kenna]]?  I think that was retired on its own merit.  [[User:Thegreatdr|Thegreatdr]] ([[User talk:Thegreatdr|talk]]) 05:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
:::Kenna was retired due to its damage, AFAIK. –'''[[User:Juliancolton|<span style="font-family:Script MT;color:#36648B">Juliancolton</span>]]'''&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;[[User_talk:Juliancolton|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:gray">''Talk''</span></sup>]] 06:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
:The source (which is an official WMO document) says they were ''retired'' and it gives the years. There is no source yet that says Alma was ''retired''. The reference that was given twice links to the lists of names at the NHC website. I do agree the whole thing should be removed, or at least commented out. It seems like people are making up records, or putting a lot of their assumptions in the article, which would be [[WP:OR]]. [[User:Potapych|Potapych]] ([[User talk:Potapych|talk]]) 12:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
::The reference that shows Gustav, Ike, and Paloma doesn't show Alma on the Pacific list; it just says Amanda, Boris, Cristina, ect, but it doesn't really say anything about the names being retired, so I'm questioning that. Then again, I might be wrong; Alma probrably was retired, and so were the others in the Atlantic. [[Special:Contributions/76.235.197.175|76.235.197.175]] ([[User talk:76.235.197.175|talk]]) 16:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
:Speaking for [[List of retired Pacific hurricane names|the article]] 17 years later, saying that Alma was retired due to catastrophic rains in Central America, this addresses the damage, but not in a direct way. Should we put that in a gray box instead of cyan? [[User:Iseriously|Iseriously]] ([[User talk:Iseriously|talk]]) 22:14, 18 March 2026 (UTC)
NHC recently posted a news article on Gustav, Ike, Paloma, and Alma. Alma, according to the article, was "retired", not "removed". Thus, I think this ends the discussion. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090501_names.html [[User:Hurricane Angel Saki|Hurricane Angel Saki]] ([[User talk:Hurricane Angel Saki|talk]]) 22:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
:Also see [http://www.news10.net/news/national/story.aspx?storyid=58708 here]: "A committee voted to retire them because the storms caused such heavy damage." –'''[[User:Juliancolton|<span style="font-family:Script MT;color:#36648B">Juliancolton</span>]]'''&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;[[User_talk:Juliancolton|<sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;color:gray">''Talk''</span></sup>]] 22:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

::What? Alma only did 33 million dollars in damage, and that isn't bad at all, even by Nicaragua's standards. East Pac. retirements occur once in a while, and we will never know what names will be retired. Kenna of 2002 caused only 101 million in damage, and that wasn't bad back then or by Mexico's standards. Nontheless, it was ''retired'' so it was the 1st tropical storm to be retired in the Eastern Pacific basin, and that should be mentioned. [[Special:Contributions/76.235.197.175|76.235.197.175]] ([[User talk:76.235.197.175|talk]]) 23:11, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

{{Talk:Tropical Storm Alma/GA1}}