User talk:Departure–

Welcome!

Hi GeorgeMemulous! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Love of Corey (talk) 01:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Mo Murda (disambiguation) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Mo Murda (disambiguation). Thanks! TheBritinator (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mo Murda (disambiguation) has been accepted

Mo Murda (disambiguation), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Disambig-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 20:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a somewhat abandoned draft article you can help me with

I invite you and anyone else who wants to to edit Draft:list of particularly dangerous situation watches. It seems as if that article has sorta been forgotten about. We’ve only gotten down to 2020 (for completely listed and in some cases not even that far) and if I recall, the entries only go back to 2018. There’s still a lot more in IEM archives. Your help at expanding the list to mainspace ready format would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. (Ps I have sent this message or a variant thereof to a bunch of other people trying to get folk’s attention drawn to that draft) West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 20:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GeorgeMemulous, don’t reply on this talk page. Please do it on the article talk page if you’re going to. Thank you. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Want to help out with a new list?

So all of the edit wars over the various mobile radar measurements got me thinking…Wouldn’t it be a cool idea to have an actual list of tornadoes measured by mobile radars? So, I started Draft:List of tornadoes observed by mobile radars. I want to make it practically WP:GA-equivalent material before moving it into mainspace (meaning probably a couple of weeks-worth of work and research). Nonetheless, I wanted to let you know about it and also to say feel free to help out if you want to. There are so many tornadic-radar publications out there…it will just take some time to dig them all up. Lol. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes Improvement Time!

Hello there! I am sending this alert to all members of the WikiProject Weather and editors who have recently edited in the realm of tornadoes.

There is a large and important discussion ongoing, with the goal to completely overhaul and improve the List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes. The previous improvement attempt back in 2022/2023 gained almost no participation. This alert is being sent out so these discussions hopefully gain a reasonably-sized participation, so the F5/EF5 tornado article, one of the most viewed weather-related articles on Wikipedia, can be improved for all readers!

If you wish to participate, please visit: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather/Possible F5/EF5/IF5 tornadoes. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Satellite tornado, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WGN. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 08:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PD-NWS Violations Update #1

I am providing members of the WikiProject of Weather along with users who frequently edit weather-related articles an update to the discussions regarding the PD-NWS image copyright template.

For starters, no "formal" administrative-style rules have occurred. All that means is the template is not formally deprecated and is still in use. However, Rlandmann, an administrator on English Wikipedia, has begun an undertaking of reviewing and assessing all images (~1,400) that use the PD-NWS copyright template.

What we know:

Following email communications, the National Weather Service of Sioux Falls has removed their disclaimer, which has been used for the PD-NWS template for decades. This means, as far as the National Weather Service is concerned, the following statement is no longer valid: By submitting images, you understand that your image is being released into the public domain. This means that your photo or video may be downloaded, copied, and used by others. Currently, the PD-NWS template links to an archived version of the disclaimer. However, the live version of the disclaimer no longer contains that phrase.
See this deletion discussion for this point's information. NWS Paducah (1) failed to give attribution to a photographer of a tornado photograph, (2) placed the photo into the public domain without the photographer explicitly giving them permission to do so (i.e. the photo is not actually in the public domain), (3) and told users to acknowledge NWS as the source for information on the webpage. Oh, to note, this photographer is a magistrate (i.e. a judge). So, the idea of automatically trusting images without clear attribution on weather.gov are free-to-use is in question.
The Wikimedia Commons has a process known as precautionary principle, where if their is significant doubt that an image is free-to-use, it will be deleted. Note, one PD-NWS file has been deleted under the precautionary principle. The closing administrator remarks for the deletion discussion were: "Per the precautionary principle, there is "significant doubt" about the public domain status of this file (4x keep + nominator, 5x delete), so I will delete it."
Several photographs/images using the PD-NWS are currently mid-deletion discussion, all for various reasonings.
As of this message, 250 PD-NWS images have been checked out of the ~1,400.
The photograph of the 1974 Xenia tornado (File:Xenia tornado.jpg) was found to not be in the public domain. It is still free-to-use, but under a CC 2.0 license, which requires attribution. From April 2009 to August 2024, Wikipedia/Wikimedia was incorrectly (and by definition, illegally) using the photograph, as it was marked incorrectly as a public domain photograph.

Solutions:
As stated earlier, there is no "formal" rulings, so no "formal" changes have been made. However, there is a general consensus between editors on things which are safe to do:

Images made directly by NWS employees can be uploaded and used under the new PD-USGov-NWS-employee template (Usage: {{PD-USGov-NWS-employee}} ). This is what a large number of PD-NWS templated images are being switched to.
Images from the NOAA Damage Assessment Toolkit (DAT) can be uploaded and used under the PD-DAT template (Usage: {{PD-DAT}} ). A large number of images are also being switched to this template.

For now, you are still welcome to upload images under the PD-NWS template. However, if possible it is recommended using the two templates above. I will send out another update when new information is found or new "rulings" have been made. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 03:49, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PD-NWS Violations Update #2 (Key To Read Third Section)

I am providing members of the WikiProject of Weather along with users who frequently edit weather-related articles an new update (2nd update) to the discussions regarding the PD-NWS image copyright template.

On the Commons, an RFC discussion is taking place to figure out how to manage the template. No "formal" administrative-style rules have occurred, so nothing has changed. That is not a surprise as the RFC is still ongoing.

What is new?

The entire Template:PD-NWS has been placed inside a "License Review" template, which is viewable via the link aforementioned.
Most of the photographs which were uploaded to the Commons originally under the PD-NWS template (approximately 1,500) have been reviewed. Out of those ~1,500 images, only about 150 are requiring additional looks. Most images have been verified as free-to-use and switched to a respective, valid template.
As of this moment, approximately 50 photos have been nominated for deletion (results pending).
A handful of images have been deleted (either confirmed copyrighted or under the Commons precautionary principle.
One image has been kept following a deletion request under the PD-NWS template.

How to deal with new photos?

Given all of this, you might be wondering how the heck you use weather photos while creating articles? Well, here is what you can do!

If the photo was made by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (excluding NWS), You can upload it under the PD-NOAA template via {{PD-NOAA}}.
If the photo was made by the National Weather Service (NOT Third Party), you can upload it using the new PD-NWS-employee template via {{PD-USGov-NWS-employee}}.
- If the photo originates on the Damage Assessment Toolkit, you can upload it using the PD-DAT template via {{PD-DAT}}.
If the photo is from a U.S. NEXRAD radar, you can upload it using the PD-NEXRAD template via via {{PD-NEXRAD}}.

What about third-party photos?

In the case of third-party photos...i.e. ones not taken by the National Weather Service themselves...there is an option which was discussed and confirmed to be valid from an English Wikipedia Administrator.

KEY: Third party images of tornadoes & weather-related content can potentially be uploaded via Wikipedia's Non-Free Content Guidelines!
Experiments/testing has been done already! In fact, I bet you couldn't tell the difference, but the tornado photograph used at the top of the 2011 Joplin tornado was already switched to a Non-Free File (NFF)! Check it out: File:Photograph of the 2011 Joplin tornado.jpeg! That photo's description can also be used as a template for future third-party tornado photographs uploaded to Wikipedia...with their respective information replaced.
NFFs can be uploaded to multiple articles as well!
The absolute key aspect of NFFs is that they relate to the article and are not decoration. For example with the Joplin tornado, the photograph: (1) shows the size of the tornado, (2) shows the "wall of darkness", which was described by witnesses, (3) shows a historic, non-repeatable event of the deadliest tornado in modern U.S. history. The exact reasoning does not have to be extremely specific as Wikipedia's NFF guidelines "is one of the most generous in the world" (words of Rlandmann (not pinged), the administrator reviewing all the PD-NWS template images).
Tornado photographs will almost certainly qualify under the NFF guidelines, especially for tornadoes with standalone articles or standalone sections.
NFFs cannot be used when a free-photograph is available, no matter the quality, unless the section is about that specific photograph. For example, the photograph used at the top of the 2013 Moore tornado article is confirmed to be free-to-use, therefore, no NFFs of that tornado can be uploaded on Wikipedia. However, the "Dead Man Walking" photograph could almost certainly be uploaded as an NFF to the 1997 Jarrell tornado article as that photograph is the topic of a section in the article.
NFFs currently on Wikipedia can and should be placed in this category: Category:Non-free pictures of tornadoes.

Update Closing

Hopefully all of that information kept you informed on the Commons copyright discussion process and how you can still create the best articles possible! If you have a question about something mentioned above, reply back and I will do my best to answer it! Also, ping me in the process to ensure I see it! Have a good day! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

I want to again remind you that you again commented on the Andrew5 SPI after it was closed. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see that it was closed because I couldn't put it to AIV due to it being cross-wiki and being on the same day. Anyway, happy September 2024! GeorgeMemulous (talk) 16:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The second message is because I have decided to re-issue the notice using an actual template. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would have reverted the first warning but you had already commented. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wikipedia:sockpuppet investigations/Andrew5. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Adding comments after an SPI has been closed can potentially be considered disruptive editing. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I’m still rather new with Twinkle. If there was a level 2 template specifically for commenting on closed/archived discussions; I would have used that instead of a generic “disruptive editing” notice template. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lokicat3345

I haven’t gotten any responses anywhere saying that you shouldn’t. So, I’d say go ahead and do the LTA report.

And in case you are trying to get information as to his MO, here is what I’ve found:

He has been a prolific sock master with dozens if not hundreds of socks. He has been active since at least August of 2023. He was indefinitely blocked and then later site banned (by the community) because of it.

I do know that most (but not necessarily all) of his sock puppets tend to use username that involve cats and/or tornadoes; and many of them also tend to use the phrase “is cool” or “are cool” or something along those lines in his username (eg. User:Meatballrunfatcat, User:Catsarecool558, User:Fatkittensarecool, User:Tornadoesarecool13, and User:Tornadoesandcats3712 among many others. There have been a few exceptions such as User:Weather article creator, User:Futuremeterologist, User:Creeperboy22011, User:Chicken nuggets are delicious, and User:Jesus is the only way to eternal life; but most have followed usual naming conventions. A full list of sockpuppets can be found at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Lokicat3345.

He has been known to edit under IPs as well. He tends to disrupt weather related articles by adding unsourced information; and suggest on talk pages that articles by written (again without citing any reliable sources). He also tends to glorify destructive events. He was apparently also blocked on the Hypothetical Tornadoes Wiki for disruption there. See WT:LTA as I have a link to an archived talk page with some information on Lokicat.

I’ll also add that based on prior SPIs; Lokicat lives in Nebraska and the geolocations of his suspected IP socks generally trace back to the Omaha metro area or at least close to it.

The users probably most familiar with his MO would probably be me, @WeatherWriter, @ChessEric, @ChrisWx, and @HamiltonthesixXmusic. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 00:31, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the page. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 00:49, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:long-term abuse/Lokicat3345 Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 00:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New tool

Hey George! I noticed that you like reverting vandalism, so may I suggest installing Ultraviolet? It makes it really easy to do things like report users at UAA or request oversight. (No, this isn't an advertisement, I genuinely thought you'd find this helpful). :) Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 19:10, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I could, I would use a tool like Ultraviolet or Huggle, but honestly most of my edits are done on locked-down hardware and can literally only be done from desktop. Thanks for the suggestion though! GeorgeMemulous (talk) 02:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SPI

Please don’t post any messages on my talk page about SPI investigations unless you are warning me that I am being accused of sockpuppetry; because you’re probably not going to get a reply back on those comments and I’ll probably revert your comment.

Per criticism from Bbb23 and others (not pinged); I will be backing away from project space a bit (except places like WP: Weather, WP:WPTC, WP:WV, WP:APPA, and WP:EKY and a couple others. I will especially be backing away from SPI, and focusing more on article related stuff such as creating tornado lists for Hurricanehink; improving my West Virginia tornado list; creating redirects; and article improvements. Thank you. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Hurricane Helene (2024)

On 27 September 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Hurricane Helene (2024), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede 66 20:10, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2024 invasion of Lebanon

On 2 October 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 invasion of Lebanon, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede 66 01:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merging 2024 Conyers BioLab fire and Bio-Lab Inc.

Hey there!

I have noticed that we both created articles centered on the recent BioLab fire. I took a broader approach that also brought into focus the earlier series of incidents, both at the Conyers plant and at the Lake Charles plant in Louisiana.

From my understanding at this point, the 2004 and 2024 disasters are essentially identical. (It's even the same (rebuilt in 2019) warehouse that caught on fire!) Given that, I was thinking it would make sense to merge the content from the 2024 Conyers BioLab fire article into the Bio-Lab Inc. article and redirect the former to the latter. I'm going to create redirects for the 2020 and 2004 Conyers incidents and the 2020 Lake Charles incidents as well, so that we have one reference point for all the time they've caught their factory on fire, lol.

Let me know if you're open to this, and I'll be happy to do the tedious work of merging the two. Cheers! Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 01:33, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that too, and the Bio-Lab Inc. article indeed has some information that should be in the 2024 fire article. My main concern was that the name, Bio-Lab, is more referred to as BioLab in sources (no hyphen). I was planning to get that done tomorrow, but for now, feel free to copy over whatever information you need from the article; just remember to attribute the text in the edit summary. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 01:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the name is sketchy because the company uses all three variants (Bio-Lab Inc., BioLab and Biolab) simultaneously, respectively on the buildings, the press releases and the logo.

I saw their Facebook page uses BioLab Inc. and that spelling is what journalists have settled into and that's not taken (BioLab is), so I'm going to move the main article there and pull from the fire article with attribution. Thanks! Acebulf ^{(talk | contribs)} 01:52, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a sockpuppet problem

So this guy named HurricaneKirk2024 (who’s naming conventions already scream Andrew5) apparently trouts me for no apparent reason (see my talk page); and then I find out that he/she also mysteriously trouted Sir MemeGod as well (see his talk page) and asked me to file an SPI report because he can’t (I don’t know; so that’s why I posted a message here to someone who does know how).

Also, please DON’T notify me of any Lokicat or Andrew5 updates, because per Bbb23, I am trying to avoid SPI/LTA. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 15:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a sock, and if it was, it'd be Lokicat, and I'd doubt that it's them. Probably just a WP:COMPETENCY issue more than it is block evasion. I'll see if I can't point them in the direction of becoming a good WPW editor in time. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well I’ve notified an administrator on this one. Competency or not; that is ridiculous. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 15:45, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've given them the overtrout template on their talk page. I don't think bringing this to an admin immediately was the best course of actions, but what's done is done. I just don't want an innocent good-faith editor being caught in the crossfire of a sock investigation. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 15:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See User:Andrew5, an LTA who is remarkably similar to this person. Sir MemeGod  15:48, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sir MemeGod, he knows about Andrew5. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 15:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. Whoopsies. :) Sir MemeGod  15:56, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar

My first barnstar! I wish it had been a happy topic, but I'm really glad that my editing is appreciated, all the same Daß Wölf 16:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was a bit shocked to see that you state you had retired on your userpage given your contributions to that page, so I hope you decide to stay! Cheers! GeorgeMemulous (talk) 16:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of IntentionallyDense -- IntentionallyDense (talk) 05:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado

The article 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado and Talk:2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of IntentionallyDense -- IntentionallyDense (talk) 22:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado

On 11 October 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a tornado near Chicago was produced by a storm with a hydrodynamical helicity four times higher than the threshold required for tornadogenesis? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado

The article 2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado for comments about the article, and Talk:2021 Naperville–Woodridge tornado/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of IntentionallyDense -- IntentionallyDense (talk) 04:02, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about How many of us have them

Hello, GeorgeMemulous

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Significa liberdade and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect How many of us have them, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15 § How many of us have them.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Significa liberdade}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning

Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper

In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins!

Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South

Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night

Book review: The Editors

Humour: The Newspaper Editors

Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	You have done a lot of constructive work in your time here and your contributions are much appreciated! I wanted to give you this as a thank you for your work here. ChrisWx ☁️ (talk - contribs) 00:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated, cheers! GeorgeMemulous (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "GeorgeMemulous", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it implies that the user is a well-known person, namely the YouTuber Memeulous. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. Folkezoft (talk) 17:30, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got 2080 edits in before the username problem finally showed up. I'll think of something by the end of the week. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Departure– (talk) 00:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

last revert

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Storm_Prediction_Center_meso-gamma_mesoscale_discussions_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1254336916 I don't know why you reverted my thingy I never put that you said that ModdiWX (You Got Mail!) 14:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

on a second thought I forgot to put my signature ModdiWX (You Got Mail!) 14:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check your talk page. Departure– (talk) 14:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2024 Cuba blackouts

On 30 October 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 Cuba blackouts, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Spencer^T•C 15:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...for the 2 hours it was up. Wasn't even aware closed / archived nominations could be posted. Departure– (talk) 01:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for 2024 Japan Series

On 3 November 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2024 Japan Series, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 23:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harrah EF3+

I've done a little bit of research/geolocating, and it is somewhat likely that the Moore EF3 and the Harrah EF3+ are the same tornado (see the ARCGis). I get that talk pages aren't forums, but that's a bit interesting. At least it didn't take the '99 or '13 path! Sir MemeGod _chat 16:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are not. NWS Norman renamed Moore to or from one of the local streetnames. Harrah and Moore are quite geologically seperated, and they were both on the DAT (albeit briefly). Two seperate EF3 tornadoes, one EF3 and one EF3+, were confirmed in last night's PNS from Norman. Departure– (talk) 16:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, nevermind then. The Moore tornado isn't showing up on the toolkit, for some reason, and I can't find much more info on it. Sir MemeGod _chat 16:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They finally added it to the toolkit, and you are indeed correct. Poor Moore. :) EF⁵ 22:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know that it was there before the PNS, too. I'm not sure why they do that, they did it with at least one of the EF3s during Milton. Departure– (talk) 22:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]