Talk:February 9–10, 2010 North American blizzard

	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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Non-tropical storms task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

comment

The article is not yet complete, it refers to a completely separate storm than the blizzard that hit 3 days prior to this one.

Shouldn't this be more professional sounding? Round 2 sounds dumb, and despite the fact that these might be separate storms, the definition of a blizzard requires that the snow either be falling, or already fallen, and therefore this can be considered the same blizzard since most of the snow blowing around is a combination of the earlier snow that already fell from the last storm and the snow from the new storm. This really should either be deleted or completely reworked, with the term "round 2" removed. I suggest just adding this content to the existing page talking about the North American blizzard of 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.162.208 (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are completely separate storms with different meteorological synopsis. The only coincidence is that they happened within days of each other and both were blizzards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.12.88.10 (talk) 20:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is almost unheard of to have two major blizzards in the Northeast so fast. A merged article (blizzards in plural) might be ideal, similar to tornado outbreak sequences. CrazyC83 (talk) 23:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are two different storms, which need two pages. In Philadelphia, the first one was the second-largest ever, and the current one will be up there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.170.130 (talk) 23:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Federal government is treating it as single storm, for federal emergency funds purposes. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

formation

Should have more detailed info on the formation of this storm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leizmonk (talk • contribs) 00:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Snow total summaries

Can be found here, via NOAA.[1] --Green Cardamom (talk) 03:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

Maryland, Delaware, DC aren't even Mentioned. MD was hit the worst with some areas getting snowed in for weeks. The people stranded on 15N in Thurmont is a good starting point for MD. Also this storm produced true blizzard conditions,a rarity along the east coast. Even 1996 and 2003 did not produce the extended period of crippling whiteout conditions that this storm produced, even though those storms dumped more snow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.120.84 (talk) 01:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't heard any fatalities associated with this storm, but should put this in if applicable. Also, might want to mention power outages as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.68.233 (talk) 15:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest separation into "Snowfall" and "Impact" sections to keep consistent with other articles on winter storms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.124.68.233 (talk) 15:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Title

The title of the article should be the North American Blizzard of 2010 Round 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.179.114 (talk) 22:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it should stay as it is, as Round 2 would imply that they were the same blizzard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.170.130 (talk) 12:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article as it stands currently (November 22, 2010) is a joke

This article is sad. Can someone clean it up? Famartin (talk) 03:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... I read the article and a few of the refs and it seems just fine to me. If Famartin thought it needed work s/he should have been specific or, of course, "clean it up" him/her self. I'm removing the tag. Gandydancer (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:First North American blizzard of 2010 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 02:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on February 9–10, 2010 North American blizzard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:18, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]