Talk:December 2023 Tennessee tornado outbreak

2023 Clarksville tornado was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 19 December 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into December 2023 Tennessee tornado outbreak. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Articles for creation B‑class

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
	This article was accepted from this draft on 12 December 2023 by reviewer NoobThreePointOh (talk · contribs).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather Low‑importance

	Weather portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes

Section size for December 2023 Tennessee tornado outbreak (12 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	4,841	4,841
Meteorological synopsis	3,989	3,989
Confirmed tornadoes	102	57,847
December 9 event	21,574	21,574
December 10 event	6,640	6,640
Clarksville, Tennessee/Allensville–Lickskillet–Auburn, Kentucky	19,675	19,675
Madison–Hendersonville–Gallatin–Castalian Springs, Tennessee	9,856	9,856
Non-tornadic effects	4,323	4,323
Aftermath	1,557	1,557
See also	107	107
Notes	24	24
References	175	175
Total	72,863	72,863

On 16 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Tornado outbreak of December 9–10, 2023 to December 2023 Tennessee tornado outbreak. The result of the discussion was moved.

Clarksville tornado

Shouldn't there be a section in the article for the tornado? Normally, if a tornado has an article, it also has a section in the outbreak article. Reeceycat123987 (talk) 13:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a full article is still in the works. The stand alone article just got made first this time for some reason.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 14:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)TornadoInformation12[reply]

ChessEric, do we really need the section in this article? Over on Talk:Tornadoes of 2023, I was imagining not even using a true stand-alone section for the tornado. Just have it linked up in the chart. That helps prevent blank-spaces, content-forks, and allows the outbreak article to grow without a single thing overpowering it. Like for instance, this outbreak, once all the 20+ tornadoes are confirmed and rated, should be notable on it's own. Since the Clarksville tornado already has an article, the info doesn't necessarily need repeated in a small stand-alone section. I know it is different than normal, but this would allow both the outbreak & stand-alone tornado articles to improve together, but also by themselves for potential GA nominations. For reference, how the chart/overall article style looks in this version is what I was thinking. Basically no stand-alone section for the tornado, just the links in the chart. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, but this is still the main page for the outbreak and some info on the tornado is still needed. While links to more descriptive articles are nice, not everyone will want to read the longer article. ChessEric 17:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I removed the infobox image since it added a ton of blank space. The section size looks good now and I'm ok with it how it is. I would still, personally, prefer no section, but I am 100% willing to compromise and such. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nashville metro tornado

I think the final rating will be EF3/4, which is why I changed it to an EF2+ Reeceycat123987 (talk) 21:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Reeceycat123987: That's a WP:Crystal Ball violation; please don't do that. ChessEric 21:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 125 mph rating is preliminary, and there are only 3 damage indicators in the damage assessment toolkit. It is very likely to be upgraded, considering the thing mentioned in the first sentence. Reeceycat123987 (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's still a WP:Crystal Ball violation. ChessEric 21:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More tornadoes

There is an EF2 in Dickson county, and an EF1 in the Florida panhandle, both on the Damage assessment toolkit Reeceycat123987 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you not know how to enter tornadoes into the table? We can help you with that if need be. ChessEric 18:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do we handle if 2023 Clarksville tornado is deleted?

Genuine question, if the community decides to delete 2023 Clarksville tornado rather than merge it, how on earth do we handle that? Do we just delete its section? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...just merge the summary into the article. It's not the big of a deal. ChessEric 18:31, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EF2 count

According to the Damage assessnment toolkit, rthere should be 5. IDK which one is missing, but there should be 1 mpore Reeceycat123987 (talk) 19:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I only see 4 (the EF3 Clarksville tornado moved through 3 NWS forecast areas; only the 1st area gave it an EF3 rating while the other two gave it an EF2 rating for their regions). Do you see another one? ChessEric 19:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops I saw the EF2 track in kentucky and thaought it was sa seperate tornado Reeceycat123987 (talk) 21:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I figured that's what it was. It's alright though. ChessEric 21:39, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Um

Some of the tornadoes are not showing up on the damage assessment toolkit unless I set the start date to December 8th. Is anyone else having this issue or is it just me? 72.46.58.62 (talk) 13:20, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I only changed 2 words, but it sys i removed 20 k bytes. Does anyone know if thsi is a glitch or what i did? Reeceycat123987 (talk) 16:26, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just saved the content. I've gotten this glitch before. In short, you were editing a previous version and it reverts everything up until that previous version. I've reported the glitch before in the past (as I am assuming you didn't know it was a previous version), but apparently it is intended. Either way, I just got the content back. You can refresh the article and then change the 2 words again. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clarksville tornado

Should we reconsider an article? It was on the ground for over 50 miles and for 74 minutes. It also happened to be on of the strongest december tornadoes in recent years. 2600:1014:B13C:B355:0:8:5B31:7B01 (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Against my opinion, there was clear consensus to not have an article for the tornado. This is a similar situation to the 2020 Nashville tornado outbreak, where there is consensus against a stand-alone article for the main tornado, but there was a consensus to rename the outbreak article for the main tornado. In the future, this article may be renamed to the 2023 Clarksville tornado outbreak as that would be the more appropriate thing rather than a stand-alone article given the consensus. Similarities as of this message: 2020 Nashville tornado is over 20% of the outbreak article, hence the rename and the 2023 Clarksville tornado section is over 34% of this outbreak article. I may propose the renaming once the finalized damage survey comes out in March 2024. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:49, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect from that name to the article name is probably fine. Half of the deaths and all but one of the tornadoes occurred outside of Clarksville. If a geographical renaming is appropriate it should be "December 2023 Middle Tennessee tornado outbreak" or similar, as with the relevant NWS WFO pages, but I think the current format works fine. Penitentes (talk) 14:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 February 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Proposed name is in line with WP:NCWWW. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 14:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado outbreak of December 9–10, 2023 → December 2023 Tennessee tornado outbreak – Let’s look at WP:CRITERIA, which is the five criteria for an article title.

Recognizability — Who actually would recognize this tornado outbreak by “December 9-10, 2023”? Editors can use Google to assist, but here is one example where the event is known as “Tennessee tornado outbreak”, not the date.
Naturalness — Readers are likely going to search for one of the two main tornadoes (Clarksville or Nashville), which both are Tennessee towns, not “December 9-10, 2023 tornado outbreak”, ect…
Precision — Both titles (current and proposed) are precise.
Concision — Both titles (current and proposed) are concise, with the new proposed title being 1 character longer.
Consistency — Other outbreaks are named based on location rather than date (2020 Nashville tornado outbreak and 1953 Waco tornado outbreak are two examples. Also, other editors have previously mentioned (see [1] below) that date-based articles may not serve readers the best anyway. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — [1] — The RM template hated a Wiki-edit link and would not work with it inside the template, so this is the link for another editor expression dislike of date-based titles. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Leaning oppose: Although Tennessee was apparently the most affected, the outbreak also spanned various other states, especially including Kentucky and Mississippi. Is there a name used by NOAA or an official weather agency? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just pointing out that the 2020 Nashville tornado outbreak affected more places than just Nashville (even a tornado stronger than the one that hit Nashville occurred on the same day). However, a requested move discussion renamed it from the date to be the “Nashville” tornado outbreak due to notability of that one tornado outshining the rest by a lot (even in RS). I think the same would apply here. Tennessee very much outshined the other few states that had a weak tornado. Even an Associated Press article focused entirely on Tennessee’s impacts (mentioning Kentucky due to the strongest tornado starting in TN and moving to KY).

To answer your question, NOAA uses “December 9, 2023” (not even the 10th, which is when most other states got hit) for their webpage. Per WP:COMMONTERM & WP:ON though, the “official name” may not be the most used name, which is for sure the case here. I have found 2 actual news articles that use “December 9” in the title, which is majorly outshined by “Tennessee” title usage. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:16, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - per WP:CRITERIA as the nominator notes and WP:NCWWW. I would also like to note that many other Wikipedia articles on other tornado outbreaks in 2023 use the "Tornado outbreak of (Month) (start date)-(end date)" format instead of the proposed alternative naming template. The WP:WEATHER community may want to come together to discuss to what extent other RMs should be initiated if this one is successful. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 00:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral but leaning support It honestly doesn't matter either way, but I can see the appeal of changing the name. ChessEric 01:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

This may be out of the scope of this specific RM. However, have other members of the WP:WEATHER community participated in a RfC discussion to name outbreaks based on their primary location? I do not recall this titling custom ever being discussed at all when I was more active editing weather articles several years ago. (Then again, tropical cyclone-related articles have been where I edit the most.) AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 00:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We've had discussion like this, but it doesn't draw in other members of WP:WEATHER so well. This is why the WP:SEVERE is so isolated honestly. We don't have many people that contribute to this in my opinion. ChessEric 01:07, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I would be down to start an RfC on it. Maybe like an RfC to decide between these options: Allow non-date titles if RS warrants/editor consensus agrees (case-by-case) OR no non-date titles allowed for tornado outbreak articles. There have been a couple of discussions around the topic, but like ChessEric said, they barely got any details. Actually, the 2020 Nashville tornado outbreak had 2 separate discussions back-to-back (split followed by a unanimous renaming discussion). However, the renaming discussion only attracted 3 editors. An RfC might attract more editors. And, it might be best to have that discussion, just so problems/questions don’t arise in the future about having non-date titled articles (even GA ones). Thoughts? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, thinking about it more, an RfC is probably the next thing to do pending this RM. While not really visualized, there is more like a policy-“debate” to figure out. Which is more important to abide by: article-title consistency (date-based) or RS-based locations names? That is the underlying discussion to have. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Early-Season" tornado outbreak?

ive noticed that the short description for the page said "early season tornado outbreak" but the page itself said that it is a "late season tornado outbreak" Why does it contradict each other? Should anyone change it? Or did I just don't understand something? SomeoneWiki04 (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's likely just a mistake. I'll fix it. ChessEric 00:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, it's already been fixed. ChessEric 00:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clarksville EF3 tornado

At the top, there is a warning message that says the section is too long. The whole section totals 20,599 bytes. I know we've already had one, but should we reconsider an article? Cellular data user (talk) 13:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Split Clarksville

Clarksville should be split into a separate article for several different reasons. The first is due to the amount of fatalities and injuries, which are 4 and 62 respectively. This tornado also caused over $21 million in damage, which is likely lower than the total amount of damage. The tornadoes section is 19,673 bytes, while the entire outbreak article is 72,863 bytes. This means that the Clarksville section is about 27% of the article. This means that 27% of the article is about 1 tornado in an outbreak of 18. Also, numerous news articles have been written about the tornado around a year after it happened, so it passes WP:LASTING. The section is also well sourced, as it contains 14 different sources. You can’t really use the excuse “It had an article before and got deleted” because of the fact that it passes WP:LASTING and is around 27% of the article. What do y’all think about splitting this, as it has more notability now? Sigma1828 (talk) 17:27, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Reasons above give this tornado enough notability for an article, especially since it passes WP:LASTING and is 27% of the entire article. 2603:80A0:C00:137:2C19:5EFD:3D2E:C3E0 (talk) 17:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @EF5 2603:80A0:C00:137:2C19:5EFD:3D2E:C3E0 (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EF5, what sound does a duck make and why am I hearing it here? Strong oppose. Departure– (talk) 18:49, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! Seems the same. To be fair, Clarksville may have an article in the future, but not now. E_F⁵ 18:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the discussion may have been started by a sock does not mean it is always invalid, although in this case it seems like the sock was trying to get attention 2603:80A0:C00:137:7170:5C0E:94C1:D1FC (talk) 18:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It means a procedural close and perhaps a rangeblock if they can easily swap IPv6 addresses. I'll close this in just a bit. Departure– (talk) 18:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]