Talk:Tornado outbreak of October 17–19, 2007

Tornado outbreak of October 17–19, 2007 has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 19, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

On 20 February 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Tornado outbreak of mid-October 2007 to Tornado outbreak of October 17–19, 2007. The result of the discussion was moved.

Weather: Non-tropical / Thunderstorms / Tornadoes 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Non-tropical storms task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Tornadoes portal This article is supported by WikiProject Severe weather (assessed as Low-importance).

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

NWS photos

Here are some photos we could use - I won't be able to add any until tonight or tomorrow, so if anyone wants to here is the link:

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/crnews/display_story.php?wfo=lsx&storyid=10651&source=0 Gopher backer 15:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~NWS Alpena also has a couple of very good shots of the Black Lake tornado at http://www.crh.noaa.gov/crnews/display_story.php?wfo=dtx&storyid=10667&source=0 Rdfox 76 18:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)~~ My mistake, that was the Detroit page. Doesn't matter anyway, as the NWS Gaylord page no longer has the photos up any more. Rdfox 76 02:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October 17 wind event

I added a section for the (mostly) straight-line wind event (the one that went through Tulsa) as that probably warrants more information if stuff can be found. It isn't everyday that 90 mph winds go straight through a major city...I called it a derecho even though I am not sure it lasted long enough for such. CrazyC83 17:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Storm Based Tornado Warning

Looking from NWS Grand Rapids site and saw this particular graphic which shows the EF2 tornado that killed 2 in Ingham County and wondering if this can be used for the article or it would too confusing or people will not really understand it. That seems to be the first time, I've seen this form of graphic for a tornado. Typically, he seed the velocity with the red and green and here we have some blue.--JForget 23:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oddities

I was wondering if an oddities section should be. In Mount Carmel, IL there were numerous reports of tornadoes from the county EMA, sherrif, and the police department. This can be seen at a local radio stations website, WYNG. However, this link will likely be cleared by Monday. (After all, it is a small town radio station, they don't archive.)This is an odditie because radar did not detect anything and the NWS did not offically record a local storm report. I went outside myself to look and I did not see anything. I did not report anything to the NWS or the local TV station I am a spotter for, WEHT. Southern Illinois SKYWARN 01:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the NWS did not report it, someone in the area should relay the information to the local office. Anything not reported by the NWS (or the agency responsible) is not official. (It is certainly possible there were a few more tornadoes not reported, particularly in the more rural areas) CrazyC83 02:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The local EMA director has said that the NWS was made aware of this, but mind you this is the same man that said watch WFIE for severe weather coverage. The chief meteorlogist for WEHT said that the NWS would be investighating this area today, so perhaps we will have a reliable reference later on today.(Saturday) I did not believe this report at first, but I have since heard many first-hand accounts. Southern Illinois SKYWARN 13:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For now I've put the report in the list of reported tornadoes along with the source from the radio station for now, but of course the source will have to be changed. Any news articles from stations from Evansville, Indianapolis, Paducah, Louisville or Cape Girardeau about this storm?JForget 15:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, right here (from WFIE) [1] Southern Illinois SKYWARN 16:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The NWS is now saying that "As time permits...additional surveys

may be performed on Monday over portions of Southeast Missouri and Southern Illinois." This might include the event in Wabash County. Southern Illinois SKYWARN 03:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation

The NWS has filed a LSR, you can look at it here, I have put it in on the outbreak page. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk • contribs) 23:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the fix although it doesn't there are any ratings yet, nor if they have done the survey.--JForget 00:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disclaimer on tornado numbers?

Should a disclaimer be added on the tornado count saying it might have been higher but some may not have been reported? Some of the areas affected (especially northern Michigan, the Ozarks and parts of Kentucky) are not exactly heavily populated. Also it is certainly not impossible that there was a tornado or two on Thursday night across the Canadian border north of Highway 17 looking at radar shots there...and almost no one lives there. CrazyC83 18:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article? If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do? Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia? At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The survey will end on April 30. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 20:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of April 12, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass

2. Factually accurate?: Tagged

3. Broad in coverage?: More Napanee info

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images?: Pass

Anything that needs work is tagged

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also suggest you use cite templates. I will help. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 17:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please fill in everything possible in the cite template, especially the access date. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 17:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To pass this article, I want references where there are {{fact}} tags, and full vertical cite templates. Use ref names to prevent the same reference from showing up twice in the reflist. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on that next. I'm just trying to get rid of the ‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› ^{[citation needed]} points (either by finding a citation, or deleting those sections if they aren't useful). I'm having some trouble finding old NHC archives (such as tropical weather discussions) for the Gulf low. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All {{fact}} tags are gone, but a ref is needed for the damages. If that isn't on Storm Data from the NCDC, I will revert it back to the last version. Like I said in the initial review, please add some more info about Napanee. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 22:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going ahead and am not going to remove that event though it is in contrast to the NCDC. I wish Cycponebiskit would have provided a reference for that. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since User:Southern Illinois SKYWARN is on a break from Wikipedia, I've take the liberty to address the remaining issues made with the GA review and pass the article. Gopher backer (talk) 03:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hawesvilletor.jpg

According to the Metadata of this picture, it was taken on February 19th, 2003 and not in 2007. If the user that inputted it cannot prove otherwise, this picture should be remove from this article.

Pierre cb (talk) 03:31, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not on here very often anymore. I agree with its removal, purely because it doesn't add anything to the article, even if it is a genuine picture. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 02:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mid-October 2007 tornado outbreak. 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) 18:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mid-October 2007 tornado outbreak. 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) 13:00, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 February 2022

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Colin M (talk) 18:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado outbreak of mid-October 2007 → Tornado outbreak of October 17–19, 2007 – Typically we have titles in this format for tornadoes. 209.201.121.4 (talk) 15:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 18:13, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Weather has been notified of this discussion. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 18:13, 28 February 2022 (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.