Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 13:42, 9 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Weather and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Shortcuts

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 30 days

2024–25 WikiProject Weather Good Article Reassessment

I would like to announce that a new task force has been created to re-examine the status of every GA in the project. Many good articles have not been reviewed in quite a while (15+ years for some) and notability requirements have changed quite a bit over the years. The goal of this task force is to save as many articles as possible. Anyone not reviewing an article may jump in to help get it up to par if it does not meet the GA requirements. The process will start officially on February 1 and will continue until every article has been checked and either kept or delisted. The task force may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather/2024–25 Good Article Reassessment. Noah, AA^Talk 15:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles under review

1949 Texas hurricane (review)
Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado (GAR)
Wind shear (GAR)

2024 Northeast United States drought

Should that article be created? The drought is nearing historic levels. Pinging Hurricanehink, a resident of a drought infected area. 71.246.109.203 (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two things, 71.246.109.203 (talk · contribs). First, I don't live in the northeast anymore. But two, there is probably enough information for an article. Why don't you create an account and try putting some information together? There have been record long periods of no rainfall across the Atlantic, and there have been some wildfires. Events like this remind me that we could probably use yearly articles for droughts/wildfires. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, looks like 2024 Northeastern United States wildfires was created. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Track maps in tornado articles

Since I've recently been trying to implement DAT-based track maps within articles (specifically this one and this one), I think it'd be nice to have a discussion as to whether track maps would be necessary within articles, or if they take up too much space. If they are a benefit, then I wouldn't mind having a larger discussion about the use of track maps and the guidelines for including them. If there is consensus that they are beneficial, then I wouldn’t mind adding them to several articles, and we’ll see where it goes from there. Pinging @Hurricane Clyde:, @Hoguert: (who I got the template from), @Dylan620: (since they may be interested), @Departure–:, @TornadoInformation12:, @Tails Wx: and @HamiltonthesixXmusic: for their opinions. E_F⁵ 22:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’d like to add @Hurricanehink and @WeatherWriter to that ping list.

And as for the track maps. It probably depends on the case. But I would support track maps in most cases. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 23:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also @EF5, some of these people that you’ve pinged haven’t edited in weeks/months; and might not respond. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 23:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True, I guess they may still come back if pinged. :) E_F⁵ 23:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of articles are cramped for media as they are, and also it should be noted that some tornadoes (cough cough Lemont, Illinois, 13 June 1976) aren't straight lines. In some cases, like El Reno 2013, a map tracing a straight line between start to end points of a tornado may miss where the tornado's worst impacts occurred entirely. Departure– (talk) 23:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in support of having some track maps for tornado articles and/or maybe outbreak sections. Speaking of cramped media, I've been reading up a lot on WP:Gallery and honestly, just like their example gallery (Women's suffrage in New Zealand#Gallery), weather articles can probably have some galleries as well. For example, the 2023 Rolling Fork–Silver City tornado caused like 15 instances of EF4 damage, yet only 3 EF4 damage photos are shown in the article (before, in, and after Rolling Fork). That said, instances of discussed EF3/EF4 damage are not shown. That aspect helps qualify images for a possible gallery, since it would not be just random images, but rather, images of items directly discussed/mentioned in the article itself. So, adding galleries for additional photos of places/damage directly discussed in the article would help allow more photos while also keeping the article itself not cramped with media. Adding some galleries also opens the door for track maps in the article itself (not in the gallery) and the gallery would free up space for it. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 23:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think a map could be useful if it was a tornado in a downtown area of a major city, where the map is especially important. I hate to say it, but if it's a random EF4 in some random city, I don't think the map is necessary, like in the case for the Cullman tornado. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Hurricane Paul (1982)#Requested move 30 Oct 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Hurricane Paul (1982)#Requested move 30 Oct 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 15:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:List of typhoons in Guam#Requested move 10 November 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of typhoons in Guam#Requested move 10 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 21:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isles of Scilly, climate-related RfC

There is a Request for Comment at Talk:Isles of Scilly about the classification of the climate. The direct link is Talk:Isles of Scilly#RfC about whether Isles of Scilly are "Subtropical". DuncanHill (talk) 01:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024 Northeast Pacific bomb cyclone

Collaboration welcome at November 2024 Northeast Pacific bomb cyclone

---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Hurricane Allen

Hurricane Allen has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:List of United States tornado emergencies#Requested move 19 November 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of United States tornado emergencies#Requested move 19 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Raladic (talk) 22:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Jet stream

Jet stream has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:47, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of tornadoes in XY trivia concerns

A user recently added tags to a lot of articles including List of tornadoes in the tornado outbreak of March 31 – April 1, 2023 stating that the article contained overly trivial content appealing only to a specific audience. I disagree with this assertion, so upon removing these tags and explaining in the edit summary that the article is standard, the user reinstated the tags and stated they're going to stick with this assertion even if it is a project-wide standard. So, I suppose, consider this a heads-up for a future RfC, because I have aspirations of getting the 31 March outbreak to a good / featured topic and these tags are killing those plans in their tracks. Departure– (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be good to ping this user in the article's talk page and ask for specific details on what they mean before escalating further. DJ Cane _(he/him) (Talk) 21:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The specific diff is here and the edit summary back-and-forth went as such:

2 December: Added {{Excessive examples}} and {{Overly detailed}} tags
6 December: Undid revision 1260738230 by Fram (talk) remove tags - this is a standard "list of tornadoes in xy outbreak" page and this one shouldn't be singled out, if there's a problem with these page's notability it'd be better to take it to Wikiproject Weather instead of this page
6 December: Undid revision 1261573129 by Departure– (talk) If the issues xith this page are standard with this project, then geel free to alert the project thzt they will have to cleanup the other articles as well. This is a list with way too much trivia

I understand their assertion and think that it would have been made inevitably. @Fram, could you please clarify your specific concerns regarding the "list of tornadoes in xyz" page format? I understand your position is that these pages consist entirely of trivia outside the scope of Wikipedia. I don't agree with that position but if you have any further comments please do share. Departure– (talk) 22:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for raising this and pinging me. I´ll have more time to answer on Monday probably. I don´t consider the whole list to be trivia, but way too many if the minor tornadoes and their (lack of) damage and so on is of no importance at all. Fram (talk) 22:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair assessment to make, but consider also that the list of tornadoes is usually included in the outbreak's article itself, and is usually only split off once it reaches 100 entries or so. If you want a really extreme example of this, see List of tornadoes in the 2011 Super Outbreak or List of tornadoes in the tornado outbreak sequence of May 2019 - these both have nearly double what the 31 March outbreak article has, and having them as separate from the outbreak's article seems obvious. I should also state that the list articles can be useful in illustrating the widespread nature of any given tornado outbreak, and remember that even a "weak" EF1 tornado can change lives, as we saw at the Apollo Theatre on 31 March. Even EF2 / EF3 tornadoes can fail the notability test for article sections, even if they have plenty of coverage and do deserve at least a mention in reference to the outbreak, and the list articles do just that. Once you have those, it's clear that including even the weak tornadoes that caused no human cost should be included. I'll compare it here to American Dad! season 20 which has a list and brief description of each episode - as a whole, these episodes have enough information to comprise a list, even those with bare-bones notability and importance. Their absence would be detrimental to the list as a whole. Departure– (talk) 23:03, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An episode seen by 300,000 people in the US alone, shown in other countries, repeated, perhaps a DVD, ... vs. a tornado which caused little or no damage or is only seen by some security camera or one or two people. More on monday! Fram (talk) 23:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This list (and many similar ones) want to describe every single tornado, no matter how minor. I see no reason why we would want to have so much unimportant, minute details, taking away the attention of the actual more major tornadoes by putting every little thing down. We don't do this for other events or accidents, we wouldn't list every car accident or building fire because some of them are important, notable, deadly, and we also don't list every damaged property, affected village, uprooted tree in the case of non-tornado storms. ... In the example list, we have 146 tornadoes, 12 of them major (EF3/4), 32 average, and 103 minor or unknown. Some of these minor ones are more notable than others, due to where or when they happened, but the vast majority are really of very passing interest only. Briefly mentioning the minor ones as groups (genre "14 EF0 en EF1 tornadoes occurred in Wisconsin, causing damage to properties and uprooting trees") and only giving more attention to the more notable ones would solve WP:UNDUE issues, not inundating the reader in countless details where minor and major stuff is given equal weight. Fram (talk) 13:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I get that they may not all be inherently notable, but the main reason I'm willing to die on this hill is I'm trying to get the March 31, 2023 tornado outbreak to featured topic status, which will require to get this article to featured list status. The criteria for featured list has the following:

Comprehensiveness.
- (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items.
- (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations.
- (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists and includes at minimum eight items; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article.

There's no reason in my eyes not to list every tornado, but a significant amount of the tornadoes were weak EF0 and EF1 tornadoes and including at the very least a one sentence summary for them would be preferred to increase the quality of the article. I'm not aware of any list where entries deemed minor or unimportant are stripped of their right to a summary, especially when there are reliable sources to put descriptions of said entries. Departure– (talk) 13:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 December 2024

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

– Literally any article entitled "List of tornadoes in the tornado outbreak / tornado outbreak sequence of XY" renamed to drop the second "tornado" in the title. It lets each article have a shorter title, and the fact that it's a tornado outbreak is obvious given that it's a list of tornadoes, established in the title. The only exception is for named outbreaks like the 2011 Super Outbreak - this is for genericly named outbreaks only. Departure– (talk) 03:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC) Departure– (talk) 03:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also Support --_ZZ^Z 'S 06:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 83: / Line 83: @@
 This list (and many similar ones) want to describe every single tornado, no matter how minor. I see no reason why we would want to have so much unimportant, minute details, taking away the attention of the actual more major tornadoes by putting every little thing down. We don't do this for other events or accidents, we wouldn't list every car accident or building fire because some of them are important, notable, deadly, and we also don't list every damaged property, affected village, uprooted tree in the case of non-tornado storms. ... In the [[List of tornadoes in the tornado outbreak of March 31 – April 1, 2023|example list]], we have 146 tornadoes, 12 of them major (EF3/4), 32 average, and 103 minor or unknown. Some of these minor ones are more notable than others, due to where or when they happened, but the vast majority are really of very passing interest only. Briefly mentioning the minor ones as groups (genre "14 EF0 en EF1 tornadoes occurred in Wisconsin, causing damage to properties and uprooting trees") and only giving more attention to the more notable ones would solve [[WP:UNDUE]] issues, not inundating the reader in countless details where minor and major stuff is given equal weight. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
+:I get that they may not all be inherently notable, but the main reason I'm willing to die on this hill is I'm trying to get the March 31, 2023 tornado outbreak to featured topic status, which will require to get this article to featured list status. The [[Wikipedia:Featured list criteria|criteria for featured list]] has the following:
+:*Comprehensiveness.
+:**(a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, '''where practical, a complete set of items;''' where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items.
+:**(b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations.
+:**(c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists and includes at minimum eight items; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article.
+:There's no reason in my eyes not to list every tornado, but a significant amount of the tornadoes were weak EF0 and EF1 tornadoes and including at the very least a one sentence summary for them would be preferred to increase the quality of the article. I'm not aware of any list where entries deemed minor or unimportant are stripped of their right to a summary, ''especially'' when there are reliable sources to put descriptions of said entries. [[User:Departure–|Departure–]] ([[User talk:Departure–|talk]]) 13:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
 == Requested move 8 December 2024 ==