Talk:Tornado outbreak of April 26–28, 2024

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 29 and 30[edit]

These days should be included in the article and title. A tornado touched down in Northeast Kansas on April 29. An outbreak of at least 13 tornadoes happened on April 30. A few of the tornadoes on the 30th were intense to violent. Also, at least 1 person was killed on April 30. Yshehru72727 (talk) 12:42, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but NO severe storms happened on the 29th. That broke the streak. 2601:5C5:4380:FD80:C5F8:EAF6:E74F:F1B0 (talk) 15:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The report for the 29th is erroneous, the tornado actually happened on the 30th. Awesomeness16807 (talk) 20:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple major tornadoes happened on the 30th, including the one that looped back on itself and the briefly stationary anticyclonic tornado. - Tenebris 66.11.165.110 (talk) 07:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move Sulphur Back To Table ?[edit]

So we really don't have enough info/details right now to do a full summary for Sulphur, and it will likely be a while until we do. Why? Because NWS Norman takes FOREVER to add their damage points to the DAT. NWS Norman has said on Twitter that they always want make sure they have the surveys 100% finished, make sure everything is absolutely correct, and get some post-analysis done before they add any damage points to the DAT. As a result, it's a slower process with them compared to other NWS offices, and they usually don't add the damage points until at least a month or two after an outbreak has happened. However, once they do decide to publish their survey details, everything will be added to the DAT all at once in one big info dump. That's what they did after the Cole/Shawnee outbreak last year, and I believe it was months later. Anyway, permission to merge back to table until DAT info is released? Once it is, I will likely make a full summary for the Marietta EF4 as well. TornadoInformation12 (talk) 11:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)TornadoInformation[reply]

Nobody seems to be against it so I went ahead and put it back in the table.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)TornadoInformation12[reply]

@TornadoInformation12: Just merged the article into this page. It's a huge mess but don't feel like fixing it. United States Man (talk) 02:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some help will be needed in merging 2024 Sulphur tornado into this article, as that was the consensus of the AfD discussion. I will still be working on the article on my sandbox as to not disturb the encyclopedia, but until the article is sufficient in info and long enough, it should be merged as soon as possible. I'm not good with merging articles, so some help is requested. Thanks! :D MemeGod ._. (My talk page, my contributions and my creations!) 22:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Utah tornado[edit]

CNN states that this tornado outbreak actually began with a Utah tornado, per https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/09/weather/us-tornado-reports-streak-climate-dg/index.html?iid=cnn_buildContentRecirc_end_recirc . Other sources clarify that this was a landspout tornado. - Tenebris 66.11.165.110 (talk) 16:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge this, April 30 - May 4 and May 6-10?[edit]

The Storm Prediciton Center has officially referred to this period as a long tornado sequence. Should we merge the three current sections into one large article, similar to the tornado outbreak sequence of May 2019? Considering this one was both in April and May, an exact date range is necessary such as Tornado outbreak sequence of April 26 – May 10, 2024. Thoughts? MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 01:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I'd be down for it. Seeing how we've seen nonstop tornado activity, it fits. MemeGod ._. (My talk page, my contributions and my creations!) 01:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. By that logic, the May 2019 sequence should've gone out to June 1.--2600:4808:353:7B01:A2C2:1257:E352:E18A (talk) 01:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I made a quick mockup in my userspace in case anyone would like to see how it would be structured. If a consensus forms to broaden this I will add this and preserve the original outbreak’s history (unless there’s some that want the May 6-9 article to have its revhistory merged too. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 01:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think SPC is designating this as a single outbreak sequence, just generally referring to a very active stretch we've been in. There are gaps in the activity that prevent that entire period from being one continuous outbreak sequence. wxtrackercody (talk · contributions) 02:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just as an example, in one of the tweets in that thread, they group together the April 13-15, 2011 and the Super Outbreak, even though they were distinctly different. I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from their tweets. wxtrackercody (talk · contributions) 02:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be an exception given how prolific that month was, as the rest are all documented sequence pages we have currently on Wikipedia, so the recent sequence should be no exception. As a side note, the only missing date in this entire sequence we had was April 30, but technically by UTC time it occurred so it’s an uninterrupted sequence. The May 1995 sequence has one gap day and it’s still considered a sequence too. Also I think if it comes from the SPC which an official organization, regardless of outlet they say it on, that should take precedence over other opinions. It’s like saying the NHC said something on Twitter about a hurricane but not including it in the article about it because it came from Twitter. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 03:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not taking exception that it came from Twitter, just the implication that they're officially designating the entire period as 1 outbreak sequence versus broadly making note of how active it's been lately. wxtrackercody (talk · contributions) 03:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with those mentioning that the SPC has referred to this extended period of time as extremely active tornado-wise. However, there were multiple days within this long stretch of severe weather that did not contain any tornadoes, and the different outbreaks came from completely different atmospheric systems, so it would not be coherent to do so, even if it would be convenient in the editor mind. Mjeims (talk) 04:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the upticks in activity are what is most documented in the two outbreak articles. Note that the period between the two outbreak articles, which had 120+ tornadoes each, has only 29 tornadoes as of right now. I could see why combining all the days would make sense, but I like the way it is now. ChessEric 05:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]