User talk:ChessEric/Archives/2022/November

Article on Ark-La-Tex tornado outbreak

Hey, just wanted to wish you good luck making that article. :) Poodle23 (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

This draft

Regarding statistics such as injuries and fatalities: personally, given the number of errors on NCEI, if something is clearly noted in the Climatological Data National Summary, I would go with it, the CDNS being an official source, the precursor to the Storm Data publication. If Grazulis differs from either CDNS or NCEI, then I would not go with his information. CapeVerdeWave (talk) 16:33, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

@CapeVerdeWave: To answer your first question, I know the CDNS report is an official source and the damage info and most of the location listed are what I use for listing the information. Grazulis' info compliments this info as well, allowing for a more accurate assessment. Unfortunately, at the end of the day, the NCEI is the official record, regardless of what that source says. If we make am exception for one article, we'd have to make am exception for all of then, which I believe would be am absolute headache. I'd rather mark the death from that one tornado as "1 unofficial death-" or put it in the summary to at least acknowledge that it is said to have killed one person, but I don't want to contradict the official records. The other question was from the second revert you made: I found it in the CDNS report, but don't remember what page it was on. It lined up with the NCEI; it was just in the wrong county. I honestly have no clue how tin source the summary though, so I'm glad you help me with doing that. I hope my explanation clears up some of your concerns. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 16:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

@ChessEric, United States Man, TornadoLGS, and Halls4521: I think it is more important to be accurate. Besides, I have seen articles that use the CDNS to correct the NCEI, both on fatalities or injuries and on location(s). For example, on many occasions we have both used the official narrative(s) in the CDNS to adjust the official coordinates by entering in an alternative path. Nevertheless, I hope more experienced users can come in and offer clarification. At this stage I do not wish to change my approach. CapeVerdeWave (talk) 16:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't think we should treat the NCDC record as infallible, especially since it has quite a few errors. We do note instances where the official record is likely in error, such as when an event officially listed as a single tornado is actually a tornado family. We may also give a range for the death toll. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

@TornadoLGS: That's true, but noting them and changing statistics are two different things. Like I said, the death should be mentioned in the summary, but not listed as "1 death-". @CapeVerdeWave: The F1 tornado north of Abilene is listed on page 58 of the CDNS 1954 Final Report. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:53, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, ChessEric. Thank you for your work on ChessEric/Tornado outbreak of TBD. User:MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Could you check up on this page? I don't think you wanted to move it to this location.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824: Oh...ummmmmm...I did. I'm making tornado outbreak articles for older years and was going to use that page for one of them. I've done this before (i.e. User:ChessEric/Tornado outbreak of March 4, 1964), but it was only briefly named that. I haven't had much time to edit lately, so I'll fix it in a moment. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I was referring to the fact that it is in mainspace. I think you want it in your userspace like the example link in your reply. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824: Oh. Whoops. Let me fix that. XD ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ChessEric/Tornado outbreak of TBD

Hello ChessEric,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged ChessEric/Tornado outbreak of TBD for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.

If you don't want ChessEric/Tornado outbreak of TBD to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:38, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824: DO IT! JUST DO IT! XD ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, this was an automated message. I wouldn't think you'd have any objection. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824: I figured that was the case. I just wanted to make a funny reply. XD ChessEric (talk · contribs) 05:46, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Just a heads up

Since you commented on many of the tornadoes in Talk:List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes/Discussion, I wanted to let you know that a bunch of new comments have been added today, so you may want to take a look at the recent comments. Have a good day! Elijahandskip (talk) 21:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: Thank's bro, although it mostly looks like someone just being a moron and fighting everybody. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 22:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Just letting you know the proposed entry wording check wasn't necessary to add it, but rather getting the consensus on the wording of the possible entry to prevent any original research additions (from Caleb Routt) being added to the note section if consensus came around to add it. Especially since they mentioned about writing it since we are "acting like a know it all". Elijahandskip (talk) 21:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip: That dude needs to stfu, but thanks for letting me know. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Colin

I saw that you replied to a user who wanted to remove Tropical Storm Colin (2022), stating to Keep. There is now a discussion on it, so you may want to reply to it. Link is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tropical Storm Colin (2022) Hurricane Su (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Weather: Map Dot & Template/Infobox Colors

Dear project member, This message is being sent out to encourage new ideas and feedback on those proposed in regard to the colors debate for WikiProject Weather. For those who are unaware of what's been happening over the last year, I will give a brief summary. We have been discussing proposed changes to the colors of the dots on tropical cyclone maps and templates and infoboxes across the entire weather project in order to solve issues related to the limited contrast between colors for both normal vision as well as the various types of color blindness (MOS:ACCESS). We had partially implemented a proposal earlier this year, however, it was objected to by a number of people and additional issues were presented that made it evident this wasn't the optimal solution. We tried to come up with other solutions to address the issues related to color contrast, however, none of them gained traction and no consensus was generated.

We need your help and I encourage you to propose your own scale and give feedback on those already listed. Keep in mind that we are NOT making a decision on any individual proposal at this time. We are simply allowing people to make proposals and cultivate them given feedback from other project members. Please visit our project page for additional details. The proposal phase will close no later than December 31st at 23:59 UTC. Noah^Talk 02:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)