Talk:Tornado outbreak and derecho of April 1–3, 2024/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Sir MemeGod (talk · contribs) 13:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Tails Wx (talk · contribs) 00:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod: I will be reviewing this! Good work on it so far. Expect a finished review towards the later part of the week.

My initial comments regards the lead – it probably should be expanded more to cover the information in the article and also, per MOS:LEADCITE, some references should probably be removed, especially the ones that cover the information in the lead later in the article. ~ Tails Wx 00:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tails Wx, don’t expect a prompt reply from Sir MemeGod, he is taking an extended break according to his page. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 01:36, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But if you’re referring to the two consecutive citations in the lead @Tails Wx; I don’t think we can remove one and keep the other because they deal with deaths in two separate regions. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 01:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although I have moved those two to the info box. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 01:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricane Clyde: I’ll note here that both citations can still be removed as a result, given that the casualties are backed up by sources later in the article and the fact that we can tally them up and include the overall total in the lead, which does not constitute original research nor need a reliable source (partially per WP:CALC). ~ Tails Wx 01:58, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to it on Monday, I have some somewhat-serious personal things going on, the "mid-December" is probably an overstatement. :) MemeGod _chat 02:09, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now unfortunately @Tails Wx I’m not exactly the best at writing lead up sections for events like this. The last time I tried; I ended up getting a user warning message on my talk page (see User talk:Hurricane Clyde/Archive 1#August 2024). Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 02:08, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

Lead

"which also included a derecho" – how about "along with a derecho"?
Per MOS:NUMNOTES, "25 people were injured" probably needs the "25" to be spelled out as "twenty-five" or re-written without the numerical in front.
"The event was given an outbreak intensity score of 28 points, ranking it as a significant tornado outbreak." – source? I don't see it listed anywhere later in the article either.
I think mentioning the floods in the Northeastern United States as a result of the system should also be included in the lead as well – a sentence or two at the least.
Adding to that point, the lead should be significantly expanded. It is broadly detailed in terms of the impacts it caused and where it affected; the lead is the summary and introduction of the article, so this lead is simply too short. I'd suggest adding how the system developed and its meteorological history in a shortened fashion, be more specific on the impacts it caused, and the aftermath of it (the casualties, the emergency response, etc.).
Are you sure there's 86 tornadoes that occurred in total in the outbreak? I'm counting close to 100 that happened according to the list. If that isn't true, that needs to be clarified.
I forgot to mention this earlier – while there are three deaths that are mentioned later in the article, the other two aren't (they were removed – I didn't look at the article closely) – both sources are KOCO and WHAS-TV. Still, these should be included further down in the "Non-tornadic effects" section and not the lead/infobox.

Confirmed tornadoes

Same thing from above – are there 86 tornadoes in total or not?
One of the two images placed on left-center of the "Watson, Indiana/Prospect–Brownsboro, Kentucky" section should probably be removed to avoid image clutter.

Copyright violations

Earwig shows lots of close paraphrasing from sources in the public domain. While this does not constitute a serious copyright violation, it requires attribution. As such, I've placed attribution tags on the main two sources that are paraphrased from the most.

~ Tails Wx 04:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll get to those Sunday evening probably. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 04:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we just co-nom this at this point? We clearly will both be working on it. :) MemeGod _chat 13:03, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve got the first three parts done. Hopefully I’ll get to some of the remaining later tonight or on Monday. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 03:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also @Tails Wx; I just counted all the tornado entries that are listed and I counted 86 (the same as is mentioned). Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 03:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the OIS mention; as that score only recently come out in 2023, and likely hasn’t been picked up by that many sources. And I think it might be mentioned in the list of tornado outbreaks by outbreak intensity score anyways. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 03:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: it’s two points short of inclusion criteria there. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 03:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod @Tails Wx; I’ve probably wrote out my expansion (of the lead) a little bit sloppy, still trying to perfect my prose-writing skills. But I have expanded the lead a bit. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 06:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tails Wx: All issues have appeared to be addressed, I just sectioned out what Clyde had already done. :) MemeGod _chat 13:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend that @Sir MemeGod look at the non-tornadic section and make sure that my mention of the five deaths was in the right place. Remember that they weren’t related to the tornadoes; and I think all or most of them drowned. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Sir MemeGod _chat 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be in the right place, I just reworded it a bit. :) Sir MemeGod _chat 16:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tails Wx, I’ve removed the one cluttering image. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 17:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, EF5 and Hurricane Clyde! I still think the lead could be expanded since it's a bit short given the length of the rest of the article. Also, in the "Non-tornadic effects" section, the section states that there were five fatalities while also stating later on the specifics of three of them in the Northeastern United States. There's two ways this can go here: either include the specifics of the other two deaths and remove the "Five people died from non-tornadic effects relating to the storm system" part, or the opposite. Otherwise, not too bad; don't expect a finished review until at least the end of the week though as I'm really busy in terms of schoolwork during these next few days. ~ Tails Wx 00:18, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t worry. That gives me and @EF5 more time to clean up the lead. I’ll probably be on a short Wikibreak on Tuesday; and will hopefully be back on Wednesday to help. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 05:37, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tails Wx: All issues have been addressed. EF⁵ 13:45, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]