Talk:Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado

Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 17, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
February 13, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 11, 2009.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Windsor Locks, Connecticut tornado caused more than $400 million in damage, making it the sixth-costliest tornado in US history?

Current status: Delisted good article

Weather: Thunderstorms / Tornadoes Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tornadoes portal This article is supported by WikiProject Severe weather (assessed as Mid-importance).

Connecticut High‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

200 million or 300 million?

I'm changing the first paragraph to read $200 million, snce the chart below the article reads $200 million. 162.136.192.1 (talk) 18:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

I changed the article name IAW Wikipedia:Naming conventions (events). --Rosiestep (talk) 22:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Windsor Locks, Connecticut tornado/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 10:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article. I'm awarding GAs-status. Pyrotec (talk) 11:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado. 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:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6fh9gLEFL?url=http://www.tornadoproject.com/alltorns/worstts.htm to http://www.tornadoproject.com/alltorns/worstts.htm

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) 05:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado. 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) 22:21, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Good Article Reassessment

I'm going to be reviewing this article as part of the reassessment drive of all weather-related good articles.

Well-written/verifiable

The opening sentence could be stronger. Right now it reads as a bit of a run-on, with struck the towns of Windsor, Windsor Locks, and Suffield, Connecticut, and Feeding Hills, Massachusetts, on Wednesday, October 3, 1979. Perhaps one of the tornado's more notable characteristics could be included in the opening, like that it was one of the costliest single tornadoes in the US, or one of three F4's in CT?
In the infobox, the damage is formatted weirdly.
Were there exactly 500 injuries? The article says " Over 400 people were hospitalized", so where did the 500 come from?
You should have some sort of note that all times are in Eastern Daylight Time (presumably). That time zone is only mentioned in the infobox.
I think you should split the storm synopsis and the impact section. Right now, you have material in both sections.
"Eyewitness reports have the tornado ripping the roof off a grocery store in Wethersfield, Connecticut. Trees were uprooted in East Hartford, Connecticut. " - so did the tornado touch down in Wethersfield then?
"Students at a Brownie meeting were led into a hallway just before the auditorium they had been in was destroyed." - the wording could be stronger
The most severe damage occurred along River Road, Hollow Brook Road, Pioneer Drive and Settler Circle, where large frame houses were left "in splinters" - who said the quote "in splinters"?
The tornado moved north into Feeding Hills before dissipating near the Westfield city line, about five miles north of the Massachusetts state line. - source?
The Windsor Locks tornado, with $1.568 billion in damages (when adjusted for inflation) - what about unadjusted for inflation?
Also is the article title the best one? There has never been another tornado to hit Windsor Locks? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Broad

The lead could be expanded a bit, it's probably too short as it is. Be sure to include damage total, deaths, injuries, and anything else notable about the tornado.
"The storm system that caused the tornado had produced severe weather, including two weak tornadoes, in eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey that morning." - any way to expand on this? When did the LPA form? Also, since it starts out an entire section, you should probably mention the date.
Any impacts in Massachusetts?
This NY Times article mentions that $50 million in damage occurred to the Connecticut National Guard
Where was the third death?

Neutral/Stable/Illustrated

Definitely neutral/stable
The satellite image is fine, but I'm not sure about the impact picture. There are other images that can be used, say from Monthly Weather Review, to illustrate the path/damage reports. It's not up to Wikipedia to have images of damage from every tornado. So I don't think the fair use claim is valid here.

Citations

Is the Tornado Project a reliable enough source?
Several citations are broken.

The article is decent, but it just doesn't quite seem up to the standards of a modern-day GA. I'll leave the review open for a week and notify the GA nominator. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:05, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be reviewing this article as part of the reassessment drive of all weather-related good articles.

Well-written/verifiable

The opening sentence could be stronger. Right now it reads as a bit of a run-on, with struck the towns of Windsor, Windsor Locks, and Suffield, Connecticut, and Feeding Hills, Massachusetts, on Wednesday, October 3, 1979. Perhaps one of the tornado's more notable characteristics could be included in the opening, like that it was one of the costliest single tornadoes in the US, or one of three F4's in CT?
In the infobox, the damage is formatted weirdly.
Were there exactly 500 injuries? The article says " Over 400 people were hospitalized", so where did the 500 come from?
You should have some sort of note that all times are in Eastern Daylight Time (presumably). That time zone is only mentioned in the infobox.
I think you should split the storm synopsis and the impact section. Right now, you have material in both sections.
"Eyewitness reports have the tornado ripping the roof off a grocery store in Wethersfield, Connecticut. Trees were uprooted in East Hartford, Connecticut. " - so did the tornado touch down in Wethersfield then?
"Students at a Brownie meeting were led into a hallway just before the auditorium they had been in was destroyed." - the wording could be stronger
The most severe damage occurred along River Road, Hollow Brook Road, Pioneer Drive and Settler Circle, where large frame houses were left "in splinters" - who said the quote "in splinters"?
The tornado moved north into Feeding Hills before dissipating near the Westfield city line, about five miles north of the Massachusetts state line. - source?
The Windsor Locks tornado, with $1.568 billion in damages (when adjusted for inflation) - what about unadjusted for inflation?
Also is the article title the best one? There has never been another tornado to hit Windsor Locks? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Broad

The lead could be expanded a bit, it's probably too short as it is. Be sure to include damage total, deaths, injuries, and anything else notable about the tornado.
"The storm system that caused the tornado had produced severe weather, including two weak tornadoes, in eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey that morning." - any way to expand on this? When did the LPA form? Also, since it starts out an entire section, you should probably mention the date.
Any impacts in Massachusetts?
This NY Times article mentions that $50 million in damage occurred to the Connecticut National Guard
Where was the third death?

Neutral/Stable/Illustrated

Definitely neutral/stable
The satellite image is fine, but I'm not sure about the impact picture. There are other images that can be used, say from Monthly Weather Review, to illustrate the path/damage reports. It's not up to Wikipedia to have images of damage from every tornado. So I don't think the fair use claim is valid here.

Citations

Is the Tornado Project a reliable enough source?
Several citations are broken.

The article is decent, but it just doesn't quite seem up to the standards of a modern-day GA. I'll leave the review open for a week and notify the GA nominator. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC) Copied from Talk:Windsor Locks, Connecticut, tornado; Please see that page for attribution. Noah, AA^Talk 23:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from WeatherWriter

I’m leaving two comments for others to reference from.

Related to Is the Tornado Project a reliable enough source? — Yes. Actually, last August during a GA review of Tornado outbreak of February 12, 1945, the exact same question came up. The Tornado Project is cited by the National Weather Service and is linked to by them in a more information page. (Further explanation on that GA review).

Sweet, thanks for verifying that. I'm not as familiar with tornadoes. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Related to the impact (damage) image and about Monthly Weather Review: Actually, I would disagree with the assessment by Hurricanehink on the fair-use image not being valid here. Monthly Weather Review was no longer owned/operated by the US government starting in 1974. Therefore, that article suggested by Hurricanehink from 1987 will not qualify at all for public domain/free-to-use images. Also, it is by the State University of New York, not US government, so that is very clearly not free-to-use images. Currently, there has not been any presentable free-to-use images related directly to the tornado (satellite image is of the supercell, not directly tornado), so the fair-use image claim is, as it stands now, entirely valid and should be treated as such for a GA review, or at least until a directly-related free-to-use image is added. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well put, that's fine then. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WeatherWriter: Im not the one who conducted the review. I only copied and pasted what was left on the TP to here. Noah, AA^Talk 20:13, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh whoops. Just realized it is Hurricanehink conducting the review and you just did a copy/paste. My apologies for that. I will correct, the name in my comment. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I messed up doing the reassessment in the first place. I'll do better in the future, I swear :P ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that the GAR officially starts at 20:27 UTC today. Noah, AA^Talk 16:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I delisted the article because of no progress on any of these issues. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:10, 12 February 2024 (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.