Talk:Tornado outbreak sequence of May 19–27, 2024

Archives (Index)

1

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Greenfield was EF5

Hiding this per WP:DENY. ChrisWx 🌀 (talk - contribs) 03:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
NWS missed a lot of damage and this tornado clearly caused EF5 damage and if you say it didnt i hope you get banned permanently for spreading false information 2600:1014:B120:C31D:0:53:2587:9901 (talk) 15:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC) You need to have a source for the “EF5” rating. Wikipedia cannot add original research to the articles as everything must be sourced by a secondary reliable source. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC) You should get banned for saying that 2600:1014:B120:C31D:0:53:2587:9901 (talk) 15:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC) WP:VNT and WP:VNTIA. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:18, 1 August 2024 (UTC) WeatherWriter is 100% right, you can't just go on Wikipedia spouting false information (even if you believe it to be true). Also, you are the one spreading false info here. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 15:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC) 2600:1014:B120:C31D:0:53:2587:9901 — To not be reverted, all you need to do is add a reliable source along with the new information. Simply put, just add the URL to where the information came from. Unless you can add a source for the information, it is classified as original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Arkansas tornado section

A section for a 2.9 km (1.8 mi) wide tornado in Arkansas (the widest in the state's history, exceeding the 2014 Mayflower–Vilonia tornado) was added, but there is little consensus on its notability, as it was an EF3 tornado that only caused 2 injuries. I'm going to advise we build a consensus on whether to keep it on the table, or whether to give it its own section to avoid any semblance of edit war. My support for the tornado's notability comes from Wikipedia:Notability (weather), which states that "If a tornado breaks a state/country/world record, it can be notable enough for Wikipedia, regardless of rating or casualties", where this tornado broke the Arkansas record for widest recorded tornado. However, I understand the lack of notability, given its mere 7.9 mi (12.7 km) path (as @ChessEric brought up) and lack of significant damage or injuries; had this occured in a more populated area, or had better data confirming meteorological importance like El Reno 2013 had, I would have no doubt it warrants inclusion. I leave it to the article's community of editors to build consensus in this talk page section. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 23:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - That doesn't mean anything. There are plenty of notable tornadoes that don't have sections like the 2015 Clarksdale-Como EF3 tornado and the 2023 Sussex County, Delaware EF3 tornado. Notability doesn't equate to automatically needing a section. ChessEric 02:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Should get its section - It should get its own section, breaking a record like being the largest tornado for a certain state is something noteworthy, besides it got a pretty decent amount of publicity Joner311 (talk) 00:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)