Talk:November 2012 nor'easter

Notability

If only The Weather Channel names their storms and the National Weather Service doesn't do it. I don't see why this should get it's own page as it is pretty much any other nor'easter that comes around the area during this time of the year. If anything, the name is a misnomer since it isn't recognized by the National Weather Service.--iGeMiNix 20:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The only reason this storm may be talked about a few years from now will be its arrival just ~one week after Sandy. — Ines(talk) 00:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

They should delete this, since the real motive of naming of winter storms by a commercial organization is rather suspect (profit/ratings), nor is it supported by any government agency or even AccuWeather (see: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-talk-winter-storm-athena-1108-20121107,0,7467578.story as well as http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/11/federal-forecasters-wont-use-winter-storm-names/). --Maqattaq (talk) 02:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, if a storm causes damage (which this one no doubt will due to it coming right after Sandy), then Wikipedia will end up having an article on it anyway. The Weather Channel provides about 75% of America with their weather data, and therefore more people will know it as Athena not as "The blabla Nor'easter of month year". I think we just have to go with it for now.. I will say I posted this on the WP:NTROP talk page a while ago and never got much response until now. gwickwire | Leave a message 02:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Let's give a few more days to see if it has any major impact before nominating for AFD. Winter storms are only notable if they cause serious damage, disruptions, or death. So far, it does not look like Athena has done any of that except causing inconvenience for Sandy victims. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 13:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I put it in because the NWS didn't support the fact that The Weather Channel went out on its own and dared to name the nor'easter. I think the Weather Channel can do what they want. They did say before in the beginning of October before {{Hurricane Sandy|Sandy]], they were going to name winter storms. http://www.weather.com/news/winter-storm-names-20121001 This storm turned out to be worse for the NE area because the colder wind came out of the north rather than what they expected, out of the east. If you decide to remove it, no problem here. Kennvido (talk) 17:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

BTW, a great job on the coverage by members on the page. I thank all you. Kennvido (talk) 17:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I think the connection with Sandy, the record snowfall, and the associated deaths make it notable enough on its own. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:48, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

• I would like to see it get a paragraph in an article with a structure similar to Winter storms of 2008–09. We need not work up into a tizzy to distribute current news to people in harms way because that is not what wikipedia is intended to do. Also wikipedia is a global encyclopedia so I wonder how much detail is going to ultimately really be notable and have enough weight to matter five months from now? Finally we ought not mirror Weather channels obvious attempt to commercialize storm names; and we should not encourage the brain numbing effect of name-saturation. Right now when NWS gives a name people perk up to wonder (should I stay or go?) I speculate that will happen less as people start to hear stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname-stormname where only one of these gets a NWS name. I wonder what civil defense and ems people think? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:00, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

"Beginning this year, The Weather Channel has started assigning names to nor'easters that will make impact." The Weather Channel isn't doing this; they don't have the authority to name any storm. The National Weather Service is and does *and* it's not just for nor'easters. Right now there's another storm getting ready to hit Montana and has been named since yesterday morning: Winter Storm Brutus. The explanation I've seen is that the NWS has wanted to do this for years but never had a good enough reason to put it into effect. Now, with Athena on the heels of Sandy, they were concerned about the "social impact" of the storm, and put the plan into action. They did this hoping that people would pay attention to the weather and understand that Athena was coming and was going to be brutal on top of the damage Sandy had caused. --Mari Adkins 16:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MariAdkins (talk • contribs)

On the contrary, the naming list is a creation of the Weather Channel. The National Weather Service does not endorse this naming system and even sent out a memo to its offices telling them not to refer to the latest nor'easter as Athena. TWC does not have this authority and the NWS is making that clear. TornadoLGS (talk) 17:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

MariAdkins, indeed you are correct that "they don't have the authority to name any storm". That is why this article must be renamed, and references to the name as if it were legitimate must be removed, without delay. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 18:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've now done it. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 19:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Article already exists. Suggest merge.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

RESOLVED; The two articles have already been merged. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

---

This storm is already discussed in the stub article November 2012 Nor'Easter. These should be merged. I also don't think the name should stick. This naming system from TWC is quite new and has not caught on. The NWS has also expressed its disapproval of this system. November 6-8, 2012 nor'easter seems a more appropriate name IMO. TornadoLGS (talk) 07:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

It makes sense because it isn't an official name. United States Man (talk) 13:29, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I have redirected that article to this one for now. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 13:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed name change to November 6–8, 2012 nor'easter

I propose the name of this article be changed to November 6–8, 2012 nor'easter and redirect this page to that article. The National Weather Service does not name nor'easter; in fact, nobody other than The Weather Channel names them. Athena should not be used as the official name. It can be mentioned in the article, but it shouldn't be the title. Inks.LWC (talk) 20:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

That title is rather long, why do you say it'll go til the 13th, and why doesn't it include the date when it started? Also, was it officially a blizzard anywhere? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:50, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Dang it... my copy paste to get the proper hyphen overwrote my initial date, and I forgot to change it. I followed the convention for previous winter storms, although we could just shorten it to "November 6-8, 2012 nor'easter". My main point was that we shouldn't be using "Winter Storm Athena". Inks.LWC (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Shows an example of an existing article that follws that convention please NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

January 25, 2000 Southeastern United States winter storm, Early December 2007 North American winter storm, Mid-December 2007 North American Winter storms, January 8–13, 2011 North American blizzard, January 31 – February 2, 2011 North American blizzard, and there's more. Like I said, we can change the name around a bit if we decide we want it to be "Early November 2012 North American winter storm", although I'd stay away from using "nor'easter" in the title, as the only article to do that is February 1969 nor'easter. Inks.LWC (talk) 21:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

There is also 2011 Halloween nor'easter. HPC called it the "early season nor'easter", so I don't see why we shouldn't use the moniker. Given that it primarily affected the NE United States (and the heaviest snowfall was in New England), what about November 2012 New England nor'easter? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Apparently you're right. There's a whole Category I'd never noticed before: [[Category:Nor'easters]]. Inks.LWC (talk) 21:32, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I am in full agreement. The NWS does not recognize Athena as the storm's name and neither should Wikipedia. November 6–8, 2012 nor'easter is the best way to go. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:43, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

What does the media call it? YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 22:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Some in the media are calling it Athena, but the larger media outlets and newspapers seem to be staying away from it so far. Inks.LWC (talk) 22:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Most major news networks have at least referred to it as Winter Storm Athena now. Also, regardless of news networks, around 75% of Americans will know it by the name Athena, due to 75% of Americans getting their weather from The Weather Channel or other related sources. Another note, regardless of CNN/FOX/MSNBC (national news) etc, NBC News has referred to it as Athena, Fox News has, and ABC news has. I think there's enough catching-on to name them based on the names now. gwickwire | Leave a message 22:54, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

In that case, couldn't the title be the November X-Y winter storm/nor'easter and the intro start with: "The November X-Y nor'easter also known as Winter Storm Athena...? — Ines(talk) 23:52, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Agree w/Hurricanehink & Ines; in text we can say which some call (whatever) NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree as well. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:25, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The only network that is not calling it Athena now is the National Weather Service. Face it. The names are going to stick except with the NWS (and I suspect that eventually they will adopt the idea as well). Why change the name to something that people aren't going to look up? People are looking for Winter Storm Athena, because that's what people hear it being called. gwickwire | Leave a message 00:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

That is what redirects are for. I remain concerned about over-naming producing a numbing effect on the average listener about real safety issues; we should be slow to just follow the herd; when cooking you can always add more salt but it is hard to take it out... we can review again after some time goes by I mean. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

That's not what redirects are for. Redirects are for plausible misspellings or misnomers. Not for the name used by the vast majority of Americans and news networks. gwickwire | Leave a message 00:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

And for alternative names and nicknames (example: 2011 Super Outbreak). This is not just a matter of the NWS not joining the crowd. As the links provided in the article point out, the NWS has explicitly disapproved of this naming system. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

But every other news network (mostly) has taken on the name. The NWS is not above these sources. The government has not yet confirmed that Obama won the election, yet we list he has due to consensus on major networks. gwickwire | Leave a message 01:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is. On your election analogy, the government hasn't denied that Obama won the election either. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:09, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

What you are basically saying is we should take the government over all major news networks. Well, quite honestly, I get my information from the NWS. But I know that over 75% (3/4) of Americans get their information just through TWC, and more get it elsewhere (CNN, ABC, FOX, etc.). We have to go by the consensus of the news networks, not one (NWS) that says no. gwickwire | Leave a message 01:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Can you supply a link for CNN, ABC, FOX, etc. who have called dit "Athena"? Inks.LWC (talk) 03:40, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

This article needs to be renamed. Things are being stated as facts and they are not. 75% of Americans do not even get The Weather Channel. Many Americans get their weather from local news. Out of networks and sites that provide just weather, TWC certainly has a major share of the audience. (especially since they bought WU) But even NBC, which owns The Weather Channel, is not using the name Athena. I have been studying the usage of the name Athena. If you look at the news sources the vast majority talk about how TWC is the one naming it and they are having to clarify that to reduce confusion. Very few sites of any kind simply state Athena without making that clarification. The sites that do are predominantly either a press release being carried on various news sites automatically, blogs or sites of TWC (including Weather Underground) or sites discussing this controversy. TWC is simply the largest company to date to try to name winter storms, not the first to try and do so in the U.S. These names are not by an official government agency or by any organization tasked to coordinate such an endeavor. TWC itself has stated there is ultimately no consistent meteorological basis for its reasoning. A significant storm that does not hit a heavily populated area may not get named while a less intense storm that hits a populated area is more likely to get a name. There is no meteorological benefit to this. You can't compare the amount of named winter storms one year to another year of named storms, if this private naming convention lasts until next year, because there is no consistency. With tropical systems they are named regardless of whether or not they impact someone. You can therefore compare data from year to year as it is based on something that is defined. A couple of people in a room at a single private company making arbitrary decisions whether to name something on a basis that is not even close to being purely meteorological in which they have a significant vested, profit making, interest is not something that Wikipedia should present in the same way as something as coordinated between the world's countries, through the WMO, as the naming of tropical cyclones are. Such coordination takes years to reduce confusion and so that there is a meteorological basis that is peer reviewed. One company a few months ago decided to do something to get ratings. If they really wanted to spearhead this, they should have coordinated with the government and other organizations in the meteorological community to come up with something that was worthwhile. They did not. Christopher Hollis (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

[1] (I saw another one on CNN earlier, but I haven't been able to find it. If I see it, I'll post it) [2] [3] [4] (and now for some other sources): [5] [6] [7] and even insurance companies are catching on: [8] That enough? Also, to the commenter above, see my links, NBC is most definitally using Athena as a name. gwickwire | Leave a message 03:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

You are linking to either press releases, articles sourced in part by quotes from TWC, an old article that mentions TWC will start naming storms which certainly was a news worthy announcement, an insurance company giving tips which is the press release showing up on many sites or something that mentions the name Athena in passing at the end of an article who title contains the word "nor’easter". What about the thousands of sites talking about this nor'easter who are not using the name Athena? Show me Athena on the front page of major sites, not buried in a travel section. And again, some of those stories still had to talk about TWC was the only one naming them. This is a tiny little fraction of a fraction of a fraction. Honestly, I thought there would be more simply to try to reduce the confusion this first time around if anyone just happened to hear that some company named a winter storm. I have been surprised by how little attention it has actually received. Athena is not a widespread name. Just wait for Brutus and then the other future names on the list and watch how increasingly little coverage they get. Christopher Hollis (talk) 04:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

And, one of those links from NBC has Athena in the link but nowhere in the article itself. You Google'd for those links probably. That is how you have to find them, they are not easy to find otherwise. I took a look at the major news networks and sites. Athena is nowhere to be found. Nor'easter is though. Try going to a major news network or major site and try to find Athena by looking for it and not by using Google. Look how easily you find nor'easter. Christopher Hollis (talk) 04:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

@gwickwire - It would not be a very good idea to go by those networks because most of the time they hype things up for publicity.

@Christopher Hollis - That is precisely what I have been thinking. United States Man (talk) 04:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, since when are major news networks not a reliable source? (No attack meant, don't take that the wrong way, we're all friends here :) ) Please refer me to the drastic change in policy so I may inform myself. gwickwire | Leave a message 04:04, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't mean totally ignore news media, but be sensible. Do you not realize that mainly the only reason they do this is for publicity? TWC could care less about naming these storms unless they thought it would attract more viewers. While official, the news media tends to exaggerate things. The NWS does not exaggerate because they don't need publicity. Knowing TWC, I am surprised that they don't have people thinking they issue advisories and warnings. United States Man (talk) 04:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

And honestly I agreed with you until a large part of other news media picked it up. Now, it's just something we have to deal with. gwickwire | Leave a message 04:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but after looking at those sources you provided (including two that were a bit of the wall), I fail to see any mention of "Athena" except in one article (excluding titles). Without support from an official weather agency, I don't see how these articles will make it. United States Man (talk) 04:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Except, as Christopher Hollis pointed out it is not a large a portion of the media as a quick google search would indicate. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

From some of the graphics that appeared on TWC's front page earlier for Athena, some could have been confused into thinking that they do issue some kind of watch or warning: http://i.imwx.com/images/maps/truvu/map_specnews36_ltst_4namus_enus_650x366.jpg Christopher Hollis (talk) 04:34, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)x2. Sometimes you have to go deeper than a "quick google search" to find the coverage. I have personally seen the networks I linked use it on live and recorded TV, and there's links above that prove it's a "large portion of the media". Also, the title is enough for me. If the title calls it (for example, not a real news report) "Winter Storm Athena slams the east coast" or "Winter Storm Athena drops snow on east coast" and then doesn't mention it again, that's fine. They are still calling it Athena. There are a lot of times a subject is only referred to once by name in news articles (think how it would be weird if news media said Romney/Obama everytime instead of president/nominee). gwickwire | Leave a message 04:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't mean to say that I had performed a quick google search. I was going with Chris Hollister's impression that you had simply googled "winter storm Athena." TornadoLGS (talk) 04:43, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Let me assure you that I did read articles and find sourcing. It was more than a google search. gwickwire | Leave a message 04:45, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

• Strongly support name change. Something simple like November 2012 nor'easter should do, or something like the other examples noted above. The relevant authoritative source on this topic is NWS, and we need to follow them. To put it bluntly, this is a rebellion against scientific authority (NWS) by moneyed interests (TWC and other media) to drum up attention for their own purposes. Let's please put Wikipedia on the side of scientific authority.

In addition to the rename, any mention of the TWC names as if they were legitimate must be removed. We must mention the TWC names, of course, but only in a brief pgh making clear their disputed status. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 15:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

• "Support" and agreed with Bluemoonlet. The excessive dates, could be complicated for readers and searching this topic would be cumbersome, however, the title should be simplified with a mention of Winter Storm Athena in the lead, along with other parts of the page where relevant. We don't need it to read November 6, 7, 8, 2012 nor'easter, or November 6-8, 2012, etc. Tinton5 (talk) 22:54, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

So you support a name change, but don't want it changed to the date. So, what would you propose to change it to to make it simpler, without using Athena? Also, Athena is more covered in major news sources than "blah blah nor'easter", or if "nor'easter" is used, it's only after making sure readers know (in the first sentence/paragraph) that the name of the storm is Athena. (edit conflict)x2 gwickwire | Leave a message 22:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps November 2012 nor'easter is the proposal in this case, though I personally prefer the version with the dates. On your second point, putting something along the lines of "The November 6–8, 2012 nor'easter referred to as Winter Storm Athena by the Weather Channel..." at the beginning of the lede should suffice.TornadoLGS (talk) 23:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I see that as undue weight toward the non Athena name, as more than half of the news sources out there are calling it Athena. The NWS does get a little bit more credit because it is the government, but not enough to override most of the news media out there. gwickwire | Leave a message 23:11, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion on how much emphasis we should give to the name is already known, as is mine. :) I think it should be mentioned only in the second paragraph, as here. It's plenty prominent to keep the reader from being confused, but does not lend legitimacy (or unduly denigrate either). --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 00:18, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

In general, we do not use unnecessary disambiguation on Wikipedia. November 2012 nor'easter describes only one notable topic, so no further disambiguation is necessary. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 00:18, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

(devil's advocate):What if there's another notable nor'easter in this month? gwickwire | Leave a message 00:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Then, and only then, would we give the article a more specific name. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 02:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Gwickwire, a majority of the media is not calling these storms by name. You keep saying that as if it were the truth. It is not. Aside from TWC, I have seen nothing on television that calls it by its name. The names are not broadly displayed on major news websites. I did see some local media stations poking fun at the naming system from clips online, but no one simply calling it by name. People are not taking the names seriously. The links you posted were not the main articles for these storms on those websites. The main articles did not contain a name at all, they said nor-easter. A single mention in passing on some other part of the site, more bloggish in nature, is not a majority of the media calling it by a name. Please do not rename the article again. The meteorlogical community is very, very against a single private company naming these storms. If the names were picked up by the media broadly, then we would have something to talk about, but they are not. Also, The Weather Channel, NBC, Weather Underground and Comcast are all the same thing. Any NBC stations may also be under the same influence, though I really have not seen it yet. The NBC video clip reported that TWC was going to start naming winter storms. NBC owns TWC. That is not neutral. But even NBC as a whole did not call this storm by a name. It was relegated to a few mentions online. This should be speedily changed back relegating any names to a minor blurb at best. Wikipedia can't choose to go with one single private company over the the government and the rest of the meteorological community. The names are not being picked up by the major media so it's insane that this is still an issue. TWC is confusing people and that extends to another new product they have. TWC actually has a new product called a "Winter Weather Watch". There are official NWS products called "winter storm watch" and "winter storm warning", but TWC felt the need to create a new product called "Winter Weather Watch". How confusing is that for people? See TWC video here: as. Not inland. Here's some link They have their own confusing tropical versions too which I didn't realize TWC was actually calling those an actual product. The NWS is tasked with providing official watches and warnings. That is simply the way it is. Nothing else is official. However, that doesn't mean you can't have other organizations provide weather coverage. For coordination however, you have one official agency which everyone else recognizes. Christopher Hollis (talk) 00:46, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Dab

Added Winter Storm Athena to Athena (disambiguation) Section: In other fields --Pawyilee (talk) 06:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Changed to read November 2012 nor'easter, referred to by The Weather Channel as Winter Storm Athena --Pawyilee (talk) 10:34, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

RfC on the validity of names given by TWC

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Editors have been expressing both sides of this issue above and on a seperate AfD page. This RfC is for me (and hopefully others) to use to determine a consensus from outside parties as to how the naming will be taken care of in Wikipedia. gwickwire | Leave a message 22:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we need a separate RfC... consensus has been pretty well established in the section above. That being said, as I've already said above, I don't think we should use TWC names as our titles. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:00, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The TWC names should not be used. United States Man (talk) 05:03, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

If there was a consensus above, I wouldn't have opened a RfC. The clutter above is us arguing more about the sourcing than the validity. This RfC will allow outside editors to come in and voice their opinion on this issue. 99.39.113.250 (talk) 05:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the most arguing has been about the validity of the naming system of TWC, which personally I think is absolutely 0% valid. United States Man (talk) 05:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I have already argued extensively that the TWC names should in no way be treated as legitimate. I don't have time to restate things here, so please search on my username at this page and at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012-13 U.S. winter storm season.

If most people think there is a consensus against using the TWC names, then why does the reversion of my changes to this page still stand? --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 10:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Because it should be given time for more people to give input. If none's given soon, it should be changed back though. Inks.LWC (talk) 10:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Guys. Please leave this RfC clean of all of the arguing we have had on the other pages. This is a simple yes/no for other outside editors to answer. If you want to discuss, do it up here, if you really feel the need to, but leave the comments section clean. Also, leave the discussion below for editors who are new to this topic to ask questions, and limit it to question/answer not persuasion. Thanks. gwickwire | Leave a message 15:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

There needs to be some arguing so others will know what this RfC is about. United States Man (talk) 16:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I linked to the full arguments above. I'll link them again here. gwickwire | Leave a message 16:31, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that's good. United States Man (talk) 16:34, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I think it's time to end this. It's been 4 days since the initial discussion started, and gwickwire is the sole editor who feels that this page should be named using TWC's naming scheme. Inks.LWC (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think a 4 to 1 vote (not really a vote) is enough consensus to rename this page. United States Man (talk) 21:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's not just about majority rules, but in the discussion above, it was 9 to 1. If it was 4 to 1, I'd say keep it open for a bit, but when it's 9 to 1, I think WP:SNOW applies. Inks.LWC (talk) 21:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think it's time to close it, but, as you say, a few more votes will result in WP:SNOW. United States Man (talk) 22:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Previous discussion (for reference)

1. AfD page
2. Higher up on this page.

Comments

• Valid, as they are used in many media sources. See links above for more discussion. gwickwire | Leave a message 15:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
• Invalid - TWC is not official and should not be treated as such. The NWS has not recognized these names and, since they are official, neither should we. United States Man (talk) 16:14, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
• Invalid - The NWS has specifically stated the name should not be used: [9]. Coverage by the media in general does not appear very widespread under this name, and TWC's criteria for naming winter storms is quite open-ended. This should be moved to a commonly used name format as discussed above, with a redirect, and maybe have "also called Winter Storm Athena" in the lede if it's notable enough. Right now half the media coverage seems to be talking about the name, and not even the storm. – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 18:09, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
• Invalid - for my reasons above and in the previous discussion. Inks.LWC (talk) 23:10, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
• Invalid - TWC does not have the authority to name storms and the NWS has expressed disapproval of the naming system. There is relatively little use of these names beyond TWC. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
• Invalid - While TWC has all the authority to name winter storms, the list has not been adopted by the National Weather Service yet, and I do not see this occurring anytime soon...not yet anyways. However, given that the names are fairly widespread in usage, I do believe there should be a section about the naming of the storm by TWC. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 22:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Why is the NWS above a majority of major news outlets? gwickwire | Leave a message 22:34, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

The National Weather Service is official, news outlets are not. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

You have never provided a majority of sources to back up what you are saying. You say that they mention Athena, but most of the sources you provided do not mention a thing about it. Several editors have said the same thing so do not try to say that they do mention it. I also believe there should be a section about the naming in every article for a storm that had a name, but it should not be the name because very few sources actually mention it. United States Man (talk) 22:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed with United States Man, it does not appear that a majority of the news media is calling this storm Athena. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Media Coverage

Answer whether there is more media coverage of Athena or of "not Athena", in your opinion.

• More Athena. See links I have posted in multiple places, or just do a google search for "Winter Storm Athena +(insert news organization here)" and you'll get results that call this storm Athena. gwickwire | Leave a message 23:58, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I do not see any widespread use, other than to discuss the name or just note it as an alternate name; do you have specific links from major media organizations titled "Winter Storm Athena" or whatnot? The first two hits from MSNBC discuss the naming issue. The only top hit from CNN is a user-submitted "iReport." The top hit from Fox News is titled "National Weather Service won't call nor' easter Athena", though the second hit from Fox Latino actually does use "Athena" once in the body (but not the title.) No hits at all for the BBC, but I did bring up an Al Jazeera article, although it doesn't actually use the name (I guess it's in a hidden keyword so it shows up in a search.) The one top NPR hit is, again, discussing the naming (and a month old.) Searching on AP or Associated Press brings up mostly articles discussing, again, controversy over the naming, with a few articles actually using the name. The first hit for "Winter Storm Athena ABC" (below a blooper video from YouTube of a local ABC channel, with the name coming from the uploader) is about Allstate though, as is the first hit for CBS, so I guess Allstate is indeed one company that does seem to be using the name. There appear to be a few local stations for those networks using the name, but that's about it. Seems like more of those local stations are discussing the naming issue though, or just occasionally dropping "Athena" in somewhere in the article (as we might for an alternate name.) The only groups that appear to have consistent widespread usage are The Weather Channel (of course) and Weather Underground (which is now owned by TWC.) – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 12:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

To 2001, that memo was internal use only, not a directive to any media outlet. Also, the name has been catching on with major news networks, if not in the title then within articles themselves. gwickwire | Leave a message 18:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Right; my point is more that we use official NWS naming for hurricanes, and in this case NWS has declined a naming scheme (AND the media is covering controversy over that.) So it seems sensible to follow national storm-naming bodies, at least for the article title. Much of the media coverage (do a Google News search just on the name "Winter Storm Athena" and you'll see a bunch) basically parallels this talk page: people aren't sure whether or not to use it, with many saying not to. [10], [11], and [12] for example, pointing out the confusion in general, that competing forecasters won't use the names, etc. The loose criteria TWC has set for naming these winter storms also seems to give undue weight as to whether there should even be an article on a storm. I don't have a problem with including the TWC name as a redirect and an alternate name in the lede, but I think using it as an article name is undue. – 2001:db8:: (rfc | diff) 18:31, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The first article is an article over the controversy. Not an article saying yes/no to use (it's also a local news station, not a national one). Second one is an article over controversy, and doesn't take into account that many major news networks have adopted Athena/Brutus by now. Here's disproof to the third article: Allstate clearly shows Allstate's use of the name Athena. More news networks are using the name Athena than aren't, so the article title should reflect that. TWC has also come out and refined their criteria, as shown in the article over the season. gwickwire | Leave a message 18:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

"More news networks are using the name Athena than aren't" Nope. Quite simply they are using it to say that The Weather Channel has given it a name and/or used it in reference to their Oct. 2 press release. NWRGeek (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Northeastern nor'easter?

Is the "northeastern" part of the title necessary? It seems a bit redundant to me. I didn't want to do the move since it seems the Athena debate isn't entirely dead yet. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I took it out. Then I spent ten minutes tracking down redirects and changing their destinations. I really don't think it's needed. United States Man (talk) 23:09, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

By definition, nor'easters only occur in the Northeastern United States. So not only the word "northeastern" but the words "United States" could be removed from the title, under the principle of not disambiguating more than necessary. But I'll leave the rest up to y'all. Best, --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 01:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the current name is against convention for nor'easter's. Before moving these pages, people should check with someone from the project on what the proper protocol is if they're unsure. Inks.LWC (talk) 03:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Let's end this stupid debate!

It appears that a vast majority of us have "voted" against "Winter Storm Athena" in the title. So let's just end this stupid debate already, and leave it as-is. Maybe add "Northeastern" back if we get an entire article on that recent storm around the Dakotas. NWRGeek (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I will put a list of the redirects in my sandbox in case the name is changed again. United States Man (talk) 23:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. NWRGeek (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

It may need to be eventually since GFS seems to suggest the possibility of another nor'easter, but we'll wait on that. TornadoLGS (talk) 23:41, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Again by the principle of no unnecessary disambiguation, more detail would need to be added to the title only if the other nor'easter also turned out to be notable. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 01:48, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I know, it's just a heads up. I wouldn't update it either unless the storm turned out to be significant, and updating it now would probably go against WP:CRYSTAL. Just wanted it to get that out there. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget to also update 2012–13 US winter storm season. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 01:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Compare Lake Storm "Aphid" (2006). ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 20:13, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Apparently based on pages NWS Buffalo stopped doing this after the 2010-11 winter. NWRGeek (talk) 20:58, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on November 2012 nor'easter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hpc.ncep.noaa.gov/discussions/hpcdiscussions.php?disc=pmdspd

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:51, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Nor'easter which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)