`  == Beta? ==  Reports are coming in very slow for Beta, but this is the information I have gotten so far from news reports, in regards to human casualties (for more info on damage, check Hurricane_Beta#Impact regularly:  *At least 30 people are reported to have been injured during Hurricane Beta's wrath on the island of Providencia. *10 boaters are reported to be missing in Puerto Cabezas.    '   News reports now saying four missing and one injured in Nicaragua.  '   There's a new image of Hurricane Beta at NASA. Maybe the current one (which is B&W;) can be replaced by this one that fits with all the other ones. I know someone likes to lighten all the borders, so I will leave this one to them.   :Done.    == Radical Reorganization ==  Well, after all this stuff about trimming things down and getting rid of information and what storms should have their own article and such, I got an idea for a major reorganization of the format of these hurricane seasons.  Remembering that Wikipedia is not paper, who really cares whether every storm gets an article, as long as a better, appropriate, from-scratch summary is left behind?  Since we're living through these events and have all this information at our fingertips, there's no reason why we can't include all the stuff people might possibly want to reference in the future.  There should be several levels of detail depending on what is desired - the season summary at the top of the season article, the storms' summaries in the context of the season article, the individual storm's summary, and the storm's article.  There have also been complaints that the length of the article is too long.  One might as well move everything to other articles, leaving only the most important bits.  This also avoids loss of otherwise fine information.  I propose the following:  The yyyy Oceanician hurricane season article has just bare bones: * An introduction of only the most important few events, like currently. * A table containing statistics, such as maximum strength, minimum pressure, number of deaths, maximum wind speed, duration, ACE, landfalls, etc.  Symbolically, like an expanded version of the navigation bar. * One column in the table with a couple-sentence to one-paragraph very condensed summary for each storm. * All other information about the season beneath this table, or summaries with details in another article (i.e. [[Forecasts for the yyyy Oceanician hurricane season]], [[Records set by the yyyy Oceanician hurricane season]])  Every named storm of the season has its own article i.e. [[Storm xyz (yyyy)]]  * A navigation bar, symbolically a mini version of the aforementioned statistics table (though in practice not much different than the current bar). * An introduction of what we currently have as the ``summaries`` (more text than numbers, like Arlene) * A main text detailing storm development, dates, times, pressures, winds, categories, deaths, etc.  This can probably include more liberal use of numbers and dates and details, like the last few sentences of Irene.  Improvements/comments/lynchings?  Feel free to copy/paste and edit this.     :I think that if we could make an article that was more than a stub of two or so paragraphs for every named storm, we should do it. Unfortunately, I don't think that there IS that much to write about every storm. And also, and more importantly, I think the majority of the storms that COULD have articles would be neglected and left with stubs. I also don't think article length is a problem, as we've got it well-divided into sections. Also, some people have said that the current format is overly technical, well.. to expand the info we have, we've need to make it even more technical. So I don't think that this plan would work out very well. Although I wish it could.    :No, Wikipedia is not paper - but that doesn't mean we should make articles about every single weather system. Why stop at cyclones? I hea