Jump to content

Talk:June 2012 North American derecho

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 2nd cell/failed derecho redevelopment

[edit]

Should that cell be covered here? It did not last long enough to be considered a second derecho on its own (only lasted through IA and IL - could not develop long enough) but did significant damage on its own in the evening. Should it be mentioned. CrazyC83 (talk) 00:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be mentioned if the damage was significant. I'd say the significance of the storm is more important in whether it should be mentioned than the mode of storm development, though it should be noted that the second cell failed to become a derecho. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll work on adding the second bow later. ATTM I'm working on getting more info about the impacts in Chicago, IN, PA, WV, and NC.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 03:28, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you're looking for quick info, I'd start with the SPC storm reports. There are 1,227 wind reports to work from for this event. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Usefulness of multiple images?

[edit]

I don't really see what the animated image of lightning adds to the article. Also the two images of uprooted trees are redundant. Perhaps just a single image should be chosen, which ought to be sufficient to convey the destructive force of the weather event. tolchocker  talk  15:50, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what the problem is - they don't crowd things and enhance the article's appearance. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Bushranger. The page isn't stuffed with pictures. I think the ones that are already present offer diverse images and perspectives on the storm. The images are all from different states - it's not like there are five pictures of downed trees from the same neighborhood.RMJ (talk) 17:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the problem either. I think the pictures that are on there should stay on there. United States Man (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If someone knows a way for me to reduce the size of the animated .gif image I created to a proper thumbnail, I'd be happy to upload a new version. Brian Adler (talk) 01:14, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it. I found it extremely distracting while reading. I wouldn't object to a non-animated version, but I do have to echo the concerns of it not really being useful. This isn't the article on Lightning. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 03:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done replaced with still version.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 22:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1998 derecho article in need of some love

[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-May_1998_tornado_outbreak_and_derecho

JKshaw (talk) 22:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This should be taken to WikiProject Severe Weather for help. In the future, go to projects, rather than related article's talk pages, for help improving an article.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 03:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

I checked a random cited source in the article, and found it bogus. The article will need a lot of work. Many anon IPs adding stuff questionable. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which cited source? They all seem fine to me.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 22:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The MCS Becomes a Derecho" Section

[edit]

What does "MCS" in the above section heading refer to? That acronym does not appear in the article. --220 of Borg 08:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mesoscale Convective System. CrazyC83 (talk) 15:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, Mesoscale Convective System. Well, now its obvious. (Not! ;-) ) Thanks! - 220 of Borg 15:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Somebody added the acronym to the article.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 09:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, folks, now, what's a derecho? Freedict gives me:

De`re´cho n. 1. A straight wind without apparent cyclonic tendency, usually accompanied with rain and often destructive, common in the prairie regions of the United States.

I didn't know that, and the article didn't tell me -- and I still don't know what was involved in this storm "becoming" one; what is the bar, or torr if you like, that it has to pass? People in the midwest may know the word routinely, but I don't think it's common elsewhere.

DavidLJ (talk) 16:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it could stand to have an explanation. I have added a wikilink for derecho at the beginning of that section. TornadoLGS (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio outages map probably a Copyvio

[edit]

I think File:AEPOH-outages.png is a CV since WP:NFCC#1 does not apply. The map could be easily replaced with an edited version of f.ex. this map. It should therefore be nominated for deletion. --Matthiasb (talk) 15:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

fair use because it's the only such image in existence and AEP isn't losing commercial opportunities due to it's use. 98.28.106.187 (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is easy to replace. A simple paint shop operation, no more than some minutes. This does not qualify Fair Use. --Matthiasb (talk) 20:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done free version made by me has been added.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 22:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I can make a suggestion about the image, I think it would be better to change up the color scheme a bit and have black for the counties with the most power outages (as well as list the key in numeric order). Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll work on it later.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 23:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Grayscale version uploaded to replace. 25% gray = <100. 50% gray = 100-500. 75% gray = 501-2000. Black = >2000.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 09:09, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]

Is there any way to remove the tornado parts from it? Since it appears there were zero confirmed tornadoes (just one that appears to not be getting confirmed). CrazyC83 (talk) 21:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 21:24, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The NWS has not confirmed or denied the tornado BTW.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 22:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Leaving the box as is shows the lack of tornadoes upfront. Derechoes are known for having few to no associated tornadoes, and the box is evidence-at-a-glance. - Tenebris 14:15, 5 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.157.43 (talk)
Exactly.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 14:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More info on IN/PA/NC?

[edit]

If anyone could help by finding/adding/citing more information on the WV and PA impacts sections, The article would be void of stub sections and thus be rendered B-class, upon checking against criteria.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 22:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs far more work for B-class IMO. There are still many un-sourced claims scattered throughout the article and the amount of information within it is small compared to what's actually available, especially for an event of this magnitude. According to a recent Reuters article, there are still one million people without power (something huge to mention within the lead). Info should be very easy to find, all you have to do is go into Google News and type "[STATE] wind (damage/storm)" and you'll get dozens of articles. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added another paragraph on WV, given the aftermath there is arguably the worst anywhere, even if the overall damage was greater elsewhere. PA may be difficult as it was relatively minor there. CrazyC83 (talk) 16:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I figured PA and NC would be the hardest  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 16:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also needs impacts from IN and Chicagoland.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 16:44, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison to Ike

[edit]

The (unsourced) comparison to Ike in the Ohio section seems a bit dubious to me. The numbers I have heard of downed power lines/poles would indicate that Ike was more damaging to the power grid. Citations are needed in this section. — RockMFR 01:56, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AEP Ohio confirmed this information on their website. I did not insert a citation because it would be a non-permanent link.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 02:34, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ATTM, the AEP Ohio site appears to be down.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 03:05, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When there's a non-permanent link, use an archive site (such as webcitation.org) to have a link to that page that never dies and will maintain the material. No reason to not cite anything Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I found a online newspaper with the quote.  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 03:26, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Power Outages low in MD

[edit]

This article states there were 800,000 outages in Maryland. As of July 6th, BGE has reported 723,000 restorations with almost 12,000 still out. Pepco does not list number of restorations, but I recall they had over 500,000 out in Maryland at one point. At least three other Maryland utilities had between 5,000 and 35,000 outages. Thus the total outages are significantly under reported in this article. Has anyone found a good summary source of total outages more recent than the one we cited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.103.21.165 (talk) 03:00, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reference addition?

[edit]

Excerpt ...

... to explain how the wildfires in Colorado, the heatwave across the eastern seaboard, and the "super derecho" are all indicative of "what global warming looks like".

99.181.139.218 (talk) 19:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

      • There's no harm in quoting a newspaper, if you want. Just keep in mind the United States gets wildfires, heatwaves, and storms EVERY year, and as population has spread out across the country over the centuries, we are better documenting them. Just don't go overboard. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:04, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is no question that the number of extreme weather events being recorded at each individual location has risen, including ones which have been highly populated all the way back to the 1870's when records began. Go ahead and add ref, also be sure to connect to the Summer 2012 North American heat wave, which was directly responsible for the derecho. (as opposed to global warming, which is indirectly responsible for the heatwave, which was in turn responsible for the derecho).  --Bowser the Storm Tracker  Chat Me Up 02:32, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio Presidentially-declared disaster area date is incorrect

[edit]

President Obama did not declare the Ohio area a disaster area (associated to the Derecho) until August 20th [1]. The reference [#20] made to the President declaring a disaster area on July 1st was associated to flooding back in the April timeframe. Proberts Pack (talk) 17:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)Proberts Pack[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.fema.gov/news-release/president-declares-major-disaster-ohio-5

Maximum wind gust

[edit]

I live in a small town in West Virginia, and l had my own wind measure thingy (can't remember what it's called)And it read 95.6 mph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reopurotekutā Asashinburēdo (talk • contribs) 12:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on June 2012 North American derecho. 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) 13:50, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on June 2012 North American derecho. 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) 21:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:June_2012_North_American_derecho&oldid=1206970864"