Talk:Extreme wind warning

	Weather portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).

Un-redirecting

I have un-redirected the article. The Extreme Wind Warning is technically distinct from tropical cyclone watches and warnings (it could theoretically be used for extratropical systems with sustained winds over 115 mph, which is an option in the AWIPS WarnGen code). Additionally, EWWs are a short term, event driven product along the lines of Tornado Warnings and Flash Flood Warnings. See here. With EWWs not covered in the TC watches & warnings article this was redirected to, and with the fact that Matthew is likely to cause its use operationally for the first time, I feel it is best to un-redirect and expand this article. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 23:05, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extreme wind warning. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070711190738/http://www.weather.gov/os/assessments/pdfs/Katrina.pdf to http://www.weather.gov/os/assessments/pdfs/Katrina.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:04, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Examples

We don't need too many examples; I propose we limit the examples to those currently listed, because the list will get too long otherwise.--Jasper Deng (talk) 12:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Text of warnings

The text of EWWs is public domain, thus there is no copyright issue including them (and they are validly attributed in the references section). Is the full text encyclopedic, however? I propose removing the full text of each warning and replacing with prose if there is some notable information in specific warning. Thoughts? -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 06:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should remove them as excessive; we're not an indiscriminate information repository.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:12, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After noticing that it makes the table virtually un-readable on mobile, I've gone ahead and removed the information. Please feel free anyone to add in a notes column if there is information that can't be contained in prose that needs readding. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 20:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So do we need one line listing for each warning, or one line for each office for each storm? For instance there were multiple warnings for Irma from several offices. Do we need a line for each of their warnings, or one line for each office, with a count of how many warnings they issued? 25or6to4 (talk) 02:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:25or6to4 - take a look at what I did - I think I edit conflicted with someone so I hope I didn't accidentally delete anything, but I reorganized (moved event to right after date, before location) and combined cells. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 03:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's about what I was thinking. The conflict was with my edit, but nothing's missing. So, next, do we need a ref for each product issued? There's been 27 EWWs issued total. 25or6to4 (talk) 03:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think there is no reason that we cannot have one reference to the IEM search page - the information about the products (issuing office and date) is already in the table itself - and we can put that reference at the top of the table.

I don’t know who put that last line of text there. But that’s not my point. I think since there is somewhat of a precedent in adding one or more examples of a warning, that one should be added here. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 20:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Separation of warnings

Should we separate the counties listed for each storm by which EWW was issued (and thus, which source was used) for each storm? I noticed it was done for Laura, and I followed the same for Michael, but I have noticed Irma, Ian, Idalia, and Helene do not currently follow this format. Cypower (talk) 04:45, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]