Talk:1974 Super Outbreak: Difference between revisions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1974 Super Outbreak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on April 3, 2005, April 3, 2006, and April 3, 2007.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Illinois High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Georgia (U.S. state) Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia 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.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)... Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles. Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category. Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state) Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state) Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs. Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner. Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard United States: Kentucky / Louisville / Mississippi / North Carolina / Ohio Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Louisville (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Mississippi (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio. Weather: Thunderstorms / Tornadoes Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Severe weather (assessed as Top-importance). Alabama This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles Canada: Ontario Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario. Disaster management Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Tennessee Low‑importance 1974 Super Outbreak is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives (Index)

1

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

^[1] Debunked by getting actual data from that National Weather Service in Omaha. If MarioProtIV believes this to be incorrect, what evidence do they have to support it? This is certainly a better source than an article in a forty year old farmer's almanac. Malnu (talk)

Reddit is not considered a reliable source nor is any original research. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 14:39, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am with StefenTower here. Reddit, per Wikipedia consensus, is considered to be a “generally unreliable” source. So to have the info removed, you need to find another reliable source. We (WikiProject Weather) had a similar situation with the 2011 Smithville tornado article, where NWS actually commented (officially) that the article was wrong, but didn’t go into detail. Similar to that situation, I went ahead and added an accuracy template to the article. Maybe the info is truly wrong, but we also have to follow Wikipedia’s policy/ideology of verifiability, not truth. (Further at WP:VNTIA). The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reddit link refers to the information that came directly from NWS. I understand not wanting to use unreliable sources, but is this really less reliable than the Farmer's Almanac entry that also has no corroborating evidence? I think the removal should stand, as it doesn't seem we can verify the information adequately. Malnu (talk) Malnu (talk) 14:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not what NWS said, but where it is posted. The original post is considered “generally unreliable” since Reddit is a “generally unreliable” source on Wikipedia. If you were to make a citation for this information of removal, the URL cannot be from Reddit.com. That is the issue. In theory, based on what NWS said, this would get a section similar to 2011 Smithville tornado#Internet fiction, since sources online would disagree. However, the source saying it is internet fiction, even if coming from NWS, cannot be on a Reddit.com-based URL per Wikipedia policy. Hopefully that explains the issue with the Reddit source. Info from NWS is always allowed, but not if it would be sourced by a Reddit.com URL in a citation. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, the citation (^[1]) below is what it it would look like if cited properly. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback! Learning more about editing today. This has been an engaging discussion, and I hope that the information I provided from the weather.gov link can be used here in a meaningful way. I think I'll step away from this one. Cheers Malnu (talk) Malnu (talk) 15:16, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood! What are your thoughts about this page published by the national weather service?

^[1]

Malnu (talk) Malnu (talk) 15:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see the NWS map posted there not showing the entire state under tornado warnings. But per Wikipedia policy, we cannot change that without it being directly stated per the no original research policy. This is oddly similar to the verifiability, not truth in action case which led to factually inaccurate info existing (and remaining per consensus) on the Tornadoes of 2022 article. Since one source (Farmers Almanac) states it directly, another reliable source has to directly state that the fact in question (i.e. entire state not under a warning) is either not true or just say the entire state was not under a warning. The reddit post referenced has all the info to counter it, but it comes from an unreliable source-based URL. That is the whole issue. I want to remove it, but per policy, I can’t. 15:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

P.S., the info for the Smithville tornado was solved and figured out several months ago, so the template doesn’t exist on that article anymore. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^[2] Also note the reference provided by the other editor. Do you have better sources than the Farmer's Almanac? Malnu (talk) Malnu (talk) 15:02, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What in this source are you referring to exactly? Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 15:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, I put the source in the wrong spot and thought there was another source there. :) I think this image from the weather service at the time is a fairly good source. Thoughts? ^[3] Malnu (talk) 15:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the warnings by county image? Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 15:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! But I believe Weather Event Writer covered that with their most recent comment. I agree that it probably should be removed, but there's good reason and precedent to keep it.

Thanks again for your feedback! Malnu (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is an issue discussed here about the info, the source is only cited a single time and for the following: At one point forecasters in Indiana, frustrated because they could not keep up with all of the simultaneous tornado activity, put the entire state of Indiana under a blanket tornado warning. This was the first and only time in U.S. history that an entire state was under a tornado warning. Per original research, the National Weather Service even published they did not issue tornado warnings for the entire state of Indiana. For all of this, let’s have a discussion to gain a consensus about removing those sentences + the farmersalamac.com reference as not being useful for the article as only a single source mentions it (i.e. no WP:LASTING citation mentions). Courtesy ping for users involved in discussion above: @Malnu:, StefenTower. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as proposer. Only a single citation/reference to this event occurring, despite thousands of other anniversary articles about it. The info alone wouldn’t meet LASTING guidelines and has no lasting coverage. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Correction: Info has been removed along with the source. It actually has not had a discussion at WP:RSN yet (period). This is the first and only discussion on Wikipedia pertaining to FarmersAlamac.com. Since there is a question to its reliability, even through OR, it actually shows it may not be a reliable source. Per WP:BRD, the source and info sourced by it should be taken to WP:RSN to re-add it for the formal “discussion” aspect of it. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I honestly don't know how to weigh this as a source in general, but a wider discussion does seem necessary due to the rarity of the claim. I say 'rarity' as this anniversary news article states "In Indiana, so many storms were around that at one time the entire state was placed under a tornado warning to deal with the threat." Of course, it's possible they lifted this from the Wikipedia or the Farmers Almanac. Also a pertinent government report from December 1974 doesn't appear to mention a statewide alert for Indiana (note that text search isn't available; I had to meat-scan it, so perhaps I missed something. :) ). Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 16:25, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Hello and good day gentlemen, wanted to get involved here as I'm the OP of the Reddit post that led to this discussion. I did want to note that the document @StefenTower has just linked is the original source from which the map used to disprove the claim via the NWS came from. The map appears on page 16 of that document. This should substantiate that no mention of a statewide warning appears in this document, as that would require the document to be in disagreement with itself. Fat Feline (talk) 17:10, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Actually, the map does not work resolutely as a counterclaim. It shows the official alerts for counties, yes, but doesn't really counter the claim there was a temporary statewide alert. Also, if you are reading a map, you are synthesizing a position. What we have is a clue but not a complete picture of the facts. We really need to know where the claim of the statewide alert originally comes from. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 17:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The earliest mention I can find of a statewide alert for Indiana comes from this 1996 History Channel documentary at 36:08, but it is a short clip. It seems that there may have been some misinterpretation at play, as it is likely the "alert" mentioned was just that, an alert urging people to take cover. This does not state a tornado warning was issued for the entire state. This also doesn't give any indication as to what their source was initially. Fat Feline (talk) 19:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Correction: The documentary is from 1997. Not 1996. Fat Feline (talk) 19:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for that. The narrator states the factoid in such a declarative manner that it likely has to point to something that happened. I did some additional searches in newspapers.com to see if there was a warning for the entire state of Indiana and it turned up dry. Of course, searches in newspapers.com are less than perfect, and it's possible I was using ineffective terms. Anyway, given this part of the article isn't key for readers to understand the subject, and we don't have a source for where this claim originally comes from, I'm OK with it being gone for at least the time-being. But I sure do want to know where this factoid sprang from. Curiouser and curiouser. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:26, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I reverted the edit initially because of good faith assumption, as it is hard to believe someone saying such information if they are using an IP to make an edit (this is a common thing on Wikipedia for IPs to make such claims without backing it up, in all areas not just WikiProject Weather). Seeing the above discussion, it seems like it’s been realized the IP was (probably?) right. Sorry for any misgivings from this. --MarioProtIV (^talk/_contribs) 21:26, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Cool story bro". For the record, the IP claim was actually me. I attempted to make an account prior to my edit last night, but was auto-denied because too many people with my IP had created an account recently. Fat Feline (talk) 03:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings though. I get that 99% of changed made by IPs on Wikipedia end up being bs. Fat Feline (talk) 03:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No hard feelings, of course! But I think it would be wise to give a little explanation as to why you make a revert when you do. Thanks! Malnu (talk) 15:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence claims it's second largest, while later in the article it says it's the largest and has a citation about how this was calculated. 73.37.72.132 (talk) 07:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first claim is about how the 2011 Super Outbreak had more tornadoes in a 24-hour period (though, this claim may be inaccurate, as many of those were weak, and the WSR-88D dual-polarized super resolution technology used to detect weak tornadoes was introduced after 1974). The second claim means that the 1974 outbreak had more violent (EF4/5) tornadoes. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, Grazulis's Outbreak Intensity Score ignores weak (EF0/1) tornadoes, and gives more weight to violent tornadoes (EF4/5). The 2011 outbreak had more EF2-3 tornadoes, but the 1974 outbreak had far more F4/5 tornadoes, so it has a higher score by those metrics. GeorgeMemulous (talk) 12:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox data was just changed for the 1st Tanner Alabama tornado and I don't know what to confirm the changes against. The same goes for most of the infoboxes. It seems to me that eventually we need to pin these things down. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 18:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect April 4, 1974 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 17 § April 4, 1974 until a consensus is reached. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 19:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]