Talk:Cyclone Maila

Artemis II pictures

The Cyclone can be seen in photos of Artemis II published by NASA on April 2nd. https://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/amf-art002e008486/ Is that notable enough for this article? QA995 (talk) 16:46, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Absolutely. OreoStar-fait (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

i’ve added a hidden text to the bottom of the met history. not sure if it needs its own section or not Sria-72 (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Records and distinctions

Is it worth mentioning that Maila is the strongest cyclone ever recorded in the Solomon Sea since reliable records began? 2425-Usagi (talk) 17:49, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but provide a citation OreoStar-fait (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Cyclone Maila and Cyclone Vaianu

sattelite imagery showing cyclones Maila and Vaianu.

These cyclones were able to develop at around the same time because of a similar meteorological setup, and I believe this should be covered under Meteorological history, but I am unsure how to include it. I thing satellite imagery showing their proximity, like this example, will help convey this, but I am unsure how to include this without crowding the article with too many images. Mitchsavl (talk) 04:10, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Did they interact at all? If not, I would say do not include it besides mentioning the conditions leading to Maila forming. Also, the page has too many images, in my opinion. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 14:06, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

If that image were to be added, it should replace the Artemis II image on the page. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 14:07, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

From what I can tell, they Vaianu, Maila and Sinlaku all formed as a result of the same Westerly wind burst, though I can only find a limited amount of sources to report on this, and some sources have only had Maila and Vaianu as thin cyclones. Mitchsavl (talk) 04:22, 14 April 2026 (UTC) Mitchsavl (talk) 04:22, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

I added Sinlaku to MH due to being twin cyclones. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 14:12, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Met history in need of expansion

I dropped the article to start class due to the incomplete met history. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Visual aid image for the track path

Comparison between track maps

manual path by user:CycloneTheta

Path generated using WP:WPTC/Tracks

Comparison added to discussion by Mitchsavl (talk) 03:30, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

I have finally decided to create a visual aid path for Cyclone Maila: see it here. It currently isn't categorised, because I need to be sure that this image is needed/wanted. Also, I have created this image in my own way, inconsistent with the rest of the manual tracks. If you want to discuss or modify this file further, I would highly suggest you visit my talk page, whilst this talk page topic can be used for the file's use on the article. CycloneTheta (talk) 07:40, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I believe that this is necessary, the current track map in the article is just not interpretable. The Bureau of meteorology's official track map is better than the current one, but it is still difficult to interpret. It may be worth keeping an eye out for the comprehensive report, as it may contain a better track map (albeit on the Australian Scale) that could be used alongside the regular one (The Bureau comprehensive reports usually have images licenced under a CC-BY-SA 4.0 Australia licence, as in the TC Fina report DOC). I very much know that it is rarely, if ever done that way on Wikipedia, but I see no harm in mentioning it. Mitchsavl (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2026 (UTC) Mitchsavl (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I am going to be bold and replace the current track map. That one is of high quality and is actually useful besides knowing that Maila just sat in one place for a week. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 10:45, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

I oppose. It's inconsistent with the rest of the track maps, not the entire track is shown, and I feel it's not necessary to include. It could potentially be included as a separate image in meteorological history, though. OreoStar-fait (talk) 02:24, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

@OreoStar-fait Sorry about not specifying earlier, but I originally intended that it be used alongside the track generator image, not as a standalone map. As I have mentioned multiple times, I can modify my track map to be closer to the official design, as well as show the entire path, so that's always an option. You're right about it not being absolutely nessecary, my map is for people who want more details on the track and not everyone needs those details. CycloneTheta (talk) 05:16, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Consistency should not come before utility. The original map is practically useless, especially in the time aspect, which is a good chunk of the purpose of the map. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

I decided that it would be good to have a comparison of the two images here, so I have added it to this discussion. I hope that's okay. Mitchsavl (talk) 03:30, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

That's fine. OreoStar-fait (talk) 03:34, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Announcement: I updated the manual path to include Maila's entire met history. I have also made an alternate version of my map without arrows on the path: see it here. The no arrows version, at least in my opinion, it is a little more suitable for a standalone image than the other. There is not much I wanted to say, I just wanted to point it out. CycloneTheta (talk) 08:22, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Personally I wonder why we need to show Fiji and Vanuatu on the original map, however, I suspect once the BoM/FMS have had a chance to BT Maila, we will have no choice but to show Queensland.Jason Rees (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

I have noticed that no one has said anything in a while, so have we made a final decision whether to use the manually created track or not? CycloneTheta (talk) 04:59, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

From what I gather, there aren't any objections to its use alongside the original, but there is an objection to it replacing the automatically generated track map. I do think that having both makes it more cluttered and a bit harder to read, so I would prefer one or the other, but I don't think that it would be the biggest issue at this stage. Mitchsavl (talk) 11:32, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

I object to using it alongside the original. The article is almost too small for its existing images. I also believe the only weakness of the manually generated map is that it does not give as much geographical context. However, that can be solved with a caption. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 13:30, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Yeah using both of them works imo. OreoStar-fait (talk) 14:04, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

It looks like after a bit of discussion, we all agree it would be useful to use the manual path alongside the automatic one. CycloneTheta (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

While I suppose there might be consensus for both, I very much do not agree to this. This page is too short for the amount of images it is trying to support in my opinion. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 23:01, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Detail map

The track path of Cyclone Maila between 1-12 April,2026

Perhaps the image could be placed in an expandable section? This would allow the image to still be there, without taking up valuable article real estate. I used Template:Collapse here, would there be a better option? Mitchsavl-on-public-wifi (talk) 01:58, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

That might be a good solution (though I still question why the traditional map is needed). ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 10:40, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Map plotting the storm's track and intensity, according to the Saffir–Simpson scale.

Alternate map

Map key

Saffir–Simpson scale

  Tropical depression (≤38 mph, ≤62 km/h)
  Tropical storm (39–73 mph, 63–118 km/h)
  Category 1 (74–95 mph, 119–153 km/h)
  Category 2 (96–110 mph, 154–177 km/h)
  Category 3 (111–129 mph, 178–208 km/h)
  Category 4 (130–156 mph, 209–251 km/h)
  Category 5 (≥157 mph, ≥252 km/h)
  Unknown

Storm type

Tropical cyclone

Subtropical cyclone

Extratropical cyclone, remnant low, tropical disturbance, or monsoon depression

I just noticed this hadn't been done; I'd completely forgot about it for a while. I tried to figure out a way to do this, but apparently the {{collapse}} template does not work in mainspace. Mitchsavl (talk) 10:05, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

I found a way to fit both images into one box, but it took some template hacking to get working. It's not perfect, as its only problem is that it only looks right in dark mode. If there is a way to make the "thumb" correctly adjust for light mode, I think my strategy could suit the article just fine. I used the <div style> parameter to make a box that closely matches the standard Wikipedia thumbnail. Inside it, I inserted the {{Multiple image}} template alongside the map key. If anyone knows how to improve this, please share. (See my /sandbox 2 subpage for now to see it.) CycloneTheta ^talk 10:35, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

There's a template for that: {{If dark}}

Make sure to read the notes that come with the template, and test it out before whacking it on there. Perhaps this could be adapted into a standalone template for {{storm track with detail map}} or something like that, because while it would only be used in a few small cases, it saves others the trouble of recreating this. Mitchsavl (talk) 11:03, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Nevermind, {{multiple image}} is working now and it also looks professional. It is currently showing the two images side by side, but the multiple image template can stack them as you wish. I don't know what was happening before, but now you can use this. CycloneTheta ^talk 00:53, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I added it to the page, but reverted as it did not render correctly. I copied it directly from your sandbox, but it still looked different. Mitchsavl (talk) 02:22, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mitchsavl I think it's a Wikipedia visual glitch. I don't know what happened. CycloneTheta ^talk 02:58, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I copied it exactly to Template:Multiple image/testcases, and it rendered correctly. Even after several refreshes (where I cleared the cache) and purges of the page, it still rendered correctly. I then edited that page, and it rendered correctly again. I believe the behaviour is inconsistent, so for technical reasons we should withhold on adding this. Mitchsavl (talk) 05:21, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mitchsavl You should report that as a visual bug (there's a way to do that). I retyped it onto one line in the article and it seems to be working just fine. Wikitext is weird at times. CycloneTheta ^talk 06:18, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I created a WP:Phabricator task for it: T431162. I also linked to this discussion from the template's talk page. Mitchsavl (talk) 07:02, 4 July 2026 (UTC)