Talk:August 2020 Midwest derecho/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

deaths

I'm not a wikipedia editor and don't even know how to properly add references. I'd appreciate some help updating this info. The deaths are up to 6 now: https://weather.com/news/news/2020-08-11-midwest-derecho-damage-impacts https://www.kcrg.com/2020/08/14/two-more-deaths-reported-following-mondays-derecho/

The death stat should be updated from 2 to 6. Additionally, this might be worth adding to the impacts section. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.25.137.84 (talk) 13:29, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Tornado number discrepancies

@453Brax, ChessEric, and TornadoInformation12:, given you folks are our main tornado section contributors/editors, I'd like to bring up that the current NOAA event review lists 21 tornados thus far. This is different from the 17 we currently have. Are these new and need to be added, unconfirmed reports that need additional verification, or something else? Gwen Hope (talk) (contrib) 06:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gwenhope: Reports are different from confirmation. One tornado can be reported more then once, so we usually wait for the damage surveys to come out before posting. Additionally, it is better to look at filtered reports as that can limit some of the overcount (20 vs. 21). One of the tornadoes was also in New York, so it doesn't count because it wasn't part of this event. Only 2 filtered tornado reports came out on the actual day of the event. The 18 other tornado reports that came in the days that followed were all from damage surveys and have been added accordingly. Everything is in, so unless another tornado gets confirmed or one of them is upgraded, I think we're good to go. Thanks for asking though. It is a team effort here, so don't be afraid to voice your concern if anything else you might want to ask about.ChessEric (talk) 09:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

ChessEric, thank you for getting back to me promptly. Tornadoes aren't my specialty, so I was wanting to make sure everything was already accounted for. Thank you very much! Go team! Gwen Hope (talk) (contrib) 19:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gwenhope: That's what happens when your up at 4 am and your not supposed to be! LOL!ChessEric (talk) 19:52, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Updating

@KZeni: I've noticed you updating things and I first-off wanted to say thank you. I needed a day of not editing this because the destruction kind makes my heart go sour. Anyway regarding updating, I would suggest updating official sources (NWS-DVN for example) instead of switching to local news sources instead. NWS sources are still regularly-updating as you are aware. So we can just update the citation for the source information to include the most recent, and I feel that is probably better since it involves less editing.

In addition, thank you for switching out the NWS wind maps, however the slight suggestion I have is that it might've been easier just to update the file page on the Commons to the new version of the images, that way we can minimize editing and not bloat Commons with every iteration of the preliminary maps. What do you think? Gwen Hope (talk) (contrib) 22:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gwenhope:, agreed on using official sources (NWS) over local news. The only reason I had switched it to a local source was due to the official source being linked to didn't actually state the specific estimated wind speed being cited at the time. In order to give proper citation (actually has/confirms the detail being cited on what's being linked) the news source did specifically state it whereas the NWS source didn't have it at the time (didn't know if a source for citation that doesn't actually have that fact shown is okay with the possibility it's added to the cited page in the future or not and/or if it's simply stating they're the organization the detail is coming from rather than having the specific page being linked to actually confirming/stating that fact.)

I also agree on the updated map files. The only reason new files were uploaded is that the old version was a .png file while the new one was a .jpg, and trying to upload a new version of the file gave me a file type mismatch error for some odd reason (it should be able to accept a graphic changing image file types, in my opinion). Oh well, I've gone ahead and simply deleted the old maps since the new ones are effectively the same while just being more detailed/accurate & those would've been used the first time around if they were available. KZeni (talk) (contrib) 17:36, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Additional SPC products

Found-Verdict, I just implemented it for you, found a few more too that were related. I leave filling in the discussion details to you! Gwen Hope (talk) (contrib) 08:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

There were a couple in there I wasn't too sure about other than being indirectly related, but thanks! Should we implement the convective outlooks as well? I think the fact that the area started with a MRGL risk with nearly no warning aside from DVN's weather stories (have them directly saved on my phone still) of a strong to severe qlcs is a really interesting point. Seeing WWA#425 when that area wasn't even in the ENH gave me a strange suspicion that morning. https://www.spc.noaa.gov/cgi-bin-spc/getacrange.pl?date0=20200810&date1=20200810&csrf=3abb1ff3b16c68da01c3eb496d454799de39c28c Found-Verdict (talk) 02:19, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Found-Verdict, how many are there? If there aren't many, it would be more fitting to discuss them in paragraph form rather than table Gwen Hope (talk) (contrib) 05:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Gwenhope, the MDT risk (45% hatched wind) was issued at 1630z, with there being 3 outlooks beforehand:(0100z MRGL, 1200z MRGL, 1300z SLGT/ENH: 30% wind). Additionally, I can get some better pictures of the structures that were estimated to receive 140 mph winds. To my knowledge there are at least 3 that look just like the photo I already uploaded. Is it possible to create an album of photos to take up less space? Found-Verdict (talk) 14:04, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I have gone about adding information to the MD table, and added a column for their related WW. I think it could be simplified somehow, but I don't want to take away from the point of a MD, which is giving information about what is happening. I feel that rephrasing would only work if done properly, in making the information easier to understand, but without eliminating...the information itself. A dilemma for sure. Found-Verdict (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:38, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

2020aug-derecho-ottawa-illinois-tornado.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

2020aug-derecho-damage-Roland-Iowa.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:08, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Damages in Indiana resulting in the derecho

I think we should add the damages toll and the death toll (since 1 killed in Fort Wayne, Indiana) and a new section to Indiana. Sure, the derecho weakened before moving across Indiana, but I think it's possible to add a new section to Indiana. I am available to respond to responses regarding to this situation. Severestorm28 talk Contribs 14:21, 10 November 2021

Ok. Go for it. --Golbez (talk) 23:47, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@Severestorm28: If you have the sources for Indiana, let's do it. The death toll is already mentioned under the Confirmed Fatalities section.