1651:– That single tornado’s article is about 22,000 bytes in size while the outbreak article is 115,000 bytes. The outbreak article is for 89 tornadoes. The “small” (quotes for a reason) section in the outbreak article for that tornado is 5,700 bytes long. Roughly, if you subtract what is duplicate/near duplicate from the two articles, you are left with about 16,000 bytes worth of content. So that is about 16,000 bytes of content that would be merged…meaning the outbreak article would be 131,000 bytes. Out of that 131,000 bytes, over 16% of the article would be about this single tornado. Note, a merge would mean over 16% of an article related to four days worth of tornadoes…with 89 total tornadoes…would be about a single tornado. That is why it was split out. I have been creating GA-worthy articles for tornadoes when they start reaching 10+% of a large outbreak’s worth of content. One tornado should not be over 16% of an article which is about 89 tornadoes. Right now, due to it being split out, it is actually 5% of the total article. This tornado is also the strongest tornado of the year, with several RS news articles years later regarding the tornado, indicating is passes
630:
based on PDS tornado warnings, dramatic radar signatures, and early unverified reports, only for it later to become apparent that the impact of the event was not as severe as initially reported. I just want to make sure you are basing the significance on reliable sources like SPC reports, damage photos, and fatality reports, and I hope you aren't just watching chaser streams or Ryan Hall and basing it off of that, as your statement that "likely 4 or more EF3 tornadoes have occurred" is highly presumptive, and reeks of group hype from tracking this event while immersed in the online severe weather community, and getting too exited over radar signatures and PDS warnings. You don't have enough info to make that call yet. Even if a bunch of debris balls pop up on radar like today, that isn't enough. Remember the violent-looking Perry County, AL supercell and tornado with the huge debris ball from the last outbreak? Only EF2 tree damage occurred. Perfect example.
712:
geographic locations, the more substancial proximity to larger populations, and the different reports that have started to flood in from this supercell-swept areas, are the reason that one can clearly see that this was no ordinary or weak outbreak by any means. That is why I said what I said before. I of course hope that I am mistaken, as devastation and fatalities are things that one does not want to see. But the hints are there. I have similarly followed weather for long enough. I try my best to not be a 100% radar-based grader, that inmediately assumes a tornado was strong for the radar signature or CC drop present in it. I apologize if I tried to state as facts something that is not certain yet. We'll see how the article develops.
197:
90:
209:
1078:(ec)While maybe not the result of the exact same low pressure system, the outbreaks still occurred on back-to-back days, so they are perceived as one outbreak. It can be clearly noted in the synopsis section that two different weather systems caused the collective event. There are many other instances of this within these outbreak pages, so I don't know why you are choosing this one to be an issue. I would support it remaining as April 4–6.
80:
53:
249:
22:
690:
occurred (for what I saw on his stream, and in my own paid radar subscription program). But
Knowledge (XXG) isn't exactly a competition. I did not create those articles to be the first one to do it. I did so because I felt it was important to start compiling information for an article that I knew may interest people, as it was based on a weather event that affected many.
1447:– Tornado emergencies do not make tornadoes inherently notable. The information can be easily contained within the table and major damage was very limited, with only two mobile homes destroyed. The remainder of damage was just trees and power lines. The number of sources available does not necessarily mean it has enough information to warrant a section. ~
1553:
I found the edit that added the statement, which indicated DAT as the source. Nothing there is mentioned about it being potentially higher than EF4. Regardless, any instance of slabbed homes raises the question of a possible EF5 rating until the survey is completed, and the statement we had said that
820:
I was thinking the same thing as United States Man. I was even hesitant to even create a section for the outbreak yesterday morning and when I did add one, I hid at first. The article was created only shortly after United States Man unhid it. I made the mistake of prematurely creating an article last
575:
Hey guys just wondering if we have enough this early on to justify an article? Clearly a tornado outbreak did occur today, but I am pouring through aftermath photos and am not finding much significant damage besides in
Pembroke, GA. I'm under the impression that a lot of the cells had a bit more bark
1620:
into this article. The tornado article is 1215 words; this one is only 2350 words, though that probably doesn't include the tables. It would not expand this article much to take the text from the tornado article and use it here. I don't think this article is long enough to need splitting, and the
1255:
I honestly was surprised that this tornado got a section. The EF3 damage was only inflicted to trees and no causalities occurred. It wasn't even the strongest or biggest tornado of the outbreak. If the
Allendale section got merge despite the tornado prompting a tornado emergency and doing the damage
726:
Yeah it's definitely some weird type of "I did it first!" phenomenon, along with people seeing whatever they want to see. I wish people would just objectively look at these events, rather than trying to justify an article every time a busy severe weather day occurs. This is a La Niña year, and it's
689:
tornado outbreaks that occurred this last March. And in a way, you are right. I was way too eager and excited to create them, even with the lack of sufficient evidence at the time. And I was indeed watching Ryan Hall at the time of this outbreak, hence my belief that multiple intense tornadoes have
768:
I agree. People like seeing their name first. But I created my first two articles with that ideal you name of being objective and just getting things going. In the initial edit of both articles, I tried to not say things that were not proven yet. I just felt that something was going on in Iowa and
633:
Also, while some outbreak articles feature tornadoes no stronger than EF2, those are exceptions as there were other factors that made those events more notable than other low to moderate intensity outbreaks (January 2020 outbreak killed 7, and the
December 15, 2022 outbreak was the largest ever to
592:
Certainly won't be the case. After witnessing multiple livestreams covering the event live, and hearing some of the recurring reports coming from them, more than likely 4 or more EF3 tornadoes have occurred. The number could go even further. Even if that wasn't the case, a tornado outbreak article
1682:
We are focused on prose count, not wiki markup size. Wiki markup size in this case is a very misleading figure which is inflated by the coding used for the tornado tables. In terms of actual words that appear on the page for the reader, neither article is anywhere close to the minimum recommended
629:
In the end, this probably will be article worthy, but I'm stating this more based on principal. I've been doing this a while, and I have seen waaaay too many articles started by over-zealous editors based on early information that hasn't been verified. Too many people presumptively start articles
1410:- As mentioned by MarioProtIV, the Allendale tornado gained significant media attention due to the TOR-E. Searching "Allendale tornado" on Google shows news articles from dozens of RS. It is equal to the amount of coverage the Pembroke tornado received. No reason not to have a section for it.
1294:
claims that “everyone agreed” to remove it but all I’ve found is one user (Cyclonebiskit) removing it and no one else mentioning it. I tried to explain this but was reverted and accused of edit-warring whereas I was only saying what I’ve seen here on the talk page. The tornado itself was notable
711:
On the other hand, on today's stream, I turned off the comment section, precisely to avoid getting caught in the hype of pre-rating tornadoes before official NWS statements. I try to be as realistic as possible, as the point you make of being presumptuous is pretty reasonable. But the different
1364:
Im not saying that we should add the section, but on the March 25, 2021 event, the West
Blocton-Vandiver tornado got itself a section, and was a low-end EF3. Now maybe it's because it was a long tracked EF3, but if we're only including the most violent tornadoes or severe tornadoes that cause
1365:
fatalities, then i dont see why we should have that section on that event either. Just keep it to
Ohatchee, Brent/Centerville and Newnan, as those were the most memorable, maybe even get rid of the Brent/Centerville event. I do oppose the Allendale tornado being added as it's own section.
1128:
I've noticed many people, including some ip addresses have been confused by the wording in the article summary because the event and name of the article don't match the opening line. Maybe this should be restructured to be clearer that April 4-5th was one storm of 2 from April 4-6th?
727:
likely going to get much worse than this as we continue deeper into tornado season. If we make an article for every rash of EF2+ tornadoes that occur this year, we'll end up making a new outbreak article every week until the end of June (obviously hyperbolizing, but you get my point).
769:
the
Southern States right away, and knew it was important to get going with an article that may be of help to many people in the future. If I seemed like steaming off in my last reply, I apologize once again. For now, let's concentrate on making this article relevant and complete.
1319:– This was a minimal EF3 in a rural area, with the only major damage occurring to 2 mobile homes. Can easily be summarized in the table. We shouldn’t just be “giving” out sections like candy. They should be reserved for when the damage can’t be adequately summarized in the table.
1092:
It seems this is fairly common for outbreak articles. If we had to choose on the matter. It would be better to have an outbreak sequence article rather than exclude April 6. I'm not suggesting that we do, I'm just saying the continuity of activity supports retaining April 6.
1240:
Yeah for sure, though on the contrary
Allendale had much more media attention because it was the first one and had a tornado emergency, which I think would make it more significant for a section than the length and speed. I personally don't like Ulmer as a section.
1165:
I really hate to ask you this question (I already annoy you enough as it is), but I really think we should include April 7 because it was still a part of the same system that produced the tornadoes on April 6. However, I want a second opinion on it. Thoughts?
888:
Usually when we create sections for individual tornadoes, the images that are placed in said sections are damage pictures, and in rare cases, pictures of the tornado itself. Of course, there are exceptions, like the radar image of the supercell during the
1883:
If a page is very short (consisting of perhaps only one or two sentences) and is, in your opinion as editor, unlikely to be expanded within a "reasonable" (unspecified) amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it into a page on a broader
1107:
I would say culturally, these systems should be in the same article, and it should be characterized with April 6th included. I think
Meteorological synopsis should definitely be expanded to account for the separate systems clearer though.
1900:
As this article exceeds the one or two sentences as well as the 150 word recommended threshold I think it is more beneficial to readers to have specific details of it handled in its own article rather than merged into the larger outbreak
893:
tornado, which does show the intense radar signature caused by the tornado. For now, lets finish completing the table with the information available, and we can then see if an image like the one you are offering may add value later
651:
I agree. I am usually pretty hesitant on creating articles myself, as I'm sure you know. Everyone wants to be the "one" who originally created the page, and I think that (and the hype) fuel these premature creations we often get.
614:
I'd say there were more than enough tornadoes to justify an article. I originally wasn't going to create one, but someone else did anyway. However, I'd say by the time all the surveys are done it will be article-worthy.
1210:
What is the significance of the Ulmer tornado to have its own section especially after we've removed the
Allendale tornado. There were no injuries or fatalities, and it only fully destroyed a single manufactured home.
634:
occur in the month of December, was highly anomalous, and accompanied by a major derecho). Bottom line, you need to make sure you are separating facts from assumptions and hype, and wait for verified info to come in.
1347:
Rating holds no wait. It is the amount of damage caused and the amount of words required to accurately summarize the damage. You sound like you're begging for it to have a section without any reasoning behind it.
1695:
nearly four years ago which was a decent bit larger than this one for a similar reason as is proposed here. Adding a few to several hundred words at most to the tornado outbreak article's section would not be
871:
849:
I agree with everyone else about not making hasty decisions, but I also don't think this outbreak will turn out unworthy of an article judging from the damage information already coming in.
1949:
227:
987:
I was assuming it would possibly imply some evidence solely because its clearly visible that there is a tornado in a easily verifiable area, and its a unique video from today. My bad ;P
1025:
I do not understand why April 6 is listed as part of this outbreak when it is clearly not. Those tornadoes came from an unrelated system and thus should be removed. I did so but
800:
I was still in the wrong for assuming something that we know now is true before getting the needed proof. Editing this article and getting to hear you guys has been important.
1485:
I know this discussion is long over, but I just wanted to point out that I was the one that made the original Allendale section and had no problems with it being merged. I
540:
The one source I could find for the Johnson County tornado gives the location relative to Egan, rather than Midlothian. What is the source for it being west of Midlothian?
1944:
682:
Believe me, I may appear as that over-zealous editor who has created articles way to early, as it happened with my first two articles that I created, both coming with the
598:
1226:
I was thinking the same thing. The only thing is that it was rated at high-end EF3 (Allendale was low-end) and the path length was 35 miles (vs. 11 miles for Allendale).
126:
821:
May and it barely made the cut as notable enough to stay. In the end, an article is needed, but we should have waited until yesterday evening to start it in my opinion.
501:
488:
475:
462:
449:
436:
422:
407:
392:
377:
362:
348:
334:
319:
305:
292:
269:
121:
1692:
151:
1033:
reverted without explanation despite me clearing stating the terms for removal in the edit summary. “They were closely related” doesn’t work here and is purely
870:
On topic of the Pembroke tornado, I was wondering if you would like a picture of how clear the tornado signature is on the radar right before it hits Pembroke.
1954:
594:
187:
141:
686:
1474:
1333:
why cant we have the allendale on here? like? the second tornado that hit bowling green on dec 10 was a ef2 but a ef3 cant be on here? explain that.
1939:
177:
683:
146:
131:
1876:: That individual tornado meets notability guidelines on its own. Despite being part of a larger outbreak, it is worthy for its own article. Per
890:
222:
63:
1464:- if we're giving sections to tornadoes that only heavily damaged/destroyed three structures, we've got a whoooooooole lot of sections to make.
1617:
947:
I saw you corrected the recent tornado because there's no evidence that it reached Cordele. I found this storm chaser video saying otherwise:
576:
than bite, but its still pretty early. If the Pembroke tornado ends up being the only EF3+ of this outbreak, should we still have an article?
1959:
1622:
136:
1724:
1638:
1634:
875:
1517:"These homes were anchor-bolted to their foundations, though there was no contextual damage evidence to support a rating above EF4."
1295:
enough in all honesty, given its strength, the fact it prompted a tornado emergency and had notable media attention to it as well. --
1934:
1859:
1723:
what’s going on with Michael? I feel like the MH was merged so that the article could achieve a status it never wound up achieving.
1305:
1047:
1691:. The tornado article would be significantly less original material if you wipe out the lead and the content overlap. We merged
114:
103:
58:
1597:
1500:
1267:
1177:
1069:
832:
33:
790:
734:
641:
581:
1655:. In short, this does not need to be moved. Even though it does not matter based on policies, but the split tornado article
970:
1700:
given its importance within the outbreak. I strongly feel this is a case that can be described within the outbreak article.
1919:
1868:
1839:
1820:
1799:
1795:
1772:
1747:
1732:
1714:
1670:
1642:
1601:
1567:
1548:
1533:
1504:
1479:
1470:
1456:
1435:
1419:
1396:
1374:
1357:
1342:
1328:
1310:
1271:
1250:
1235:
1220:
1195:
1181:
1153:
1138:
1117:
1102:
1087:
1073:
1052:
1010:
996:
982:
959:
925:
911:
879:
858:
836:
809:
794:
778:
738:
721:
661:
645:
624:
609:
585:
564:
549:
1521:
1370:
1520:
If this is unsourced, then it should be removed, but if it is sourced, then it should be added to the possible EF5s on
1431:
1392:
1353:
1324:
1231:
1191:
1149:
1083:
657:
620:
560:
1863:
1737:
That was only part of it. It's simply that nobody had the time to spend to work on getting Michael up to GA or FA.
1656:
1583:
786:
730:
637:
577:
1465:
1728:
196:
39:
1366:
1767:
1667:
1630:
1544:
1529:
1452:
1415:
1783:
1427:
1388:
1349:
1320:
1289:
1227:
1187:
1160:
1145:
1079:
942:
921:
653:
616:
556:
1855:
1338:
1892:
1684:
1761:, there is only 600 or so words that is in the Pembroke article that isn't already in this article. ♫
1563:
1098:
1006:
978:
917:
545:
1688:
1652:
21:
1738:
1720:
1705:
1591:
1494:
1261:
1246:
1216:
1171:
1134:
1113:
1063:
992:
955:
854:
826:
89:
1586:
put that in. He does that a lot and I trust that he knows what he's talking about in these cases.
1387:
The damage caused by those tornadoes cannot be accurately summarized in the table. Allendale can.
1762:
1662:
1626:
1578:
1540:
1525:
1448:
1411:
593:
does not need to have intense tornadoes as a pre-requirement for existing. See, for example, the
1877:
1697:
1034:
948:
113:
and related subjects on Knowledge (XXG). To participate, help improve this article or visit the
1915:
1835:
1791:
1848:
1334:
1298:
1040:
907:
805:
774:
717:
606:
214:
1895:
doesn't recommend merging based on article size unless the length is under about 150 words.
1574:
1559:
1094:
1002:
974:
541:
966:
1539:
Noting that I have removed the sentence until a source is located for that information.
1816:
1587:
1490:
1257:
1242:
1212:
1167:
1130:
1109:
1059:
1058:
My explanation came in the next edit. I hit enter before I could clarify why I did it.
1028:
988:
951:
850:
822:
95:
1928:
1621:
tornado does not have sufficient sources to require a stand-alone article. See also
1904:
1831:
1787:
1808:
per above. The way it is written doesn't justify the small size of the article.
903:
801:
770:
713:
602:
79:
52:
204:
85:
1810:
965:
We generally don't go by personal Twitter accounts as they do not meet
109:
1186:
Probably so. If we included the 6th it would also need the 7th.
1744:
1711:
243:
15:
195:
1426:
Plenty of reason to not have a section. As I stated above.
783:
Well I'm eating crow now, because now we've got 4 EF3s lol.
1256:
it did, then the Ulmer section one can be merged too.
1780:– The article is well written and goes into detail
1830:Size doesn't matter per reasoning by DJ Cane below
1659:and is one of the very few tornadic GA articles.
1950:Low-importance Thunderstorm and tornado articles
1286:Why can’t we give Allendale it’s own section?
1683:word count of 6000 for a split, mentioned at
8:
270:Tornado outbreak sequence of April 4–7, 2022
1693:Meteorological history of Hurricane Michael
1144:It should. I had the same thought earlier.
1781:
601:articles. None feature intense tornadoes.
599:December 2021 derecho and tornado outbreak
266:
255:
47:
1945:C-Class Thunderstorm and tornado articles
1001:I somehow missed the roadsign, actually.
1687:. Additionally, there is quite a bit of
1510:Pembroke Phrase - Context needed for EF5
49:
19:
872:2601:800:4000:A730:C493:31F9:9808:7BDA
423:Pembroke–Ellabell–Black Creek, Georgia
7:
969:. I take it the source you used was
101:This article is within the scope of
1955:WikiProject Severe weather articles
162:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Weather
38:It is of interest to the following
14:
1618:2022 Pembroke–Black Creek tornado
936:First April 6th tornado / Cordele
1037:which is grounds for removal. --
247:
207:
88:
78:
51:
20:
1940:Low-importance Weather articles
1124:Article Summary and event dates
182:This article has been rated as
1920:16:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
1869:17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1840:10:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
1821:22:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1800:16:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1773:05:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1748:23:13, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1733:22:54, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1715:03:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1671:01:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1643:01:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1602:17:21, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
1:
220:This article is supported by
1960:WikiProject Weather articles
1657:passed a Good Article Review
1522:List of F5 and EF5 tornadoes
1514:Which source confirms this?
165:Template:WikiProject Weather
1976:
1505:03:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
1480:02:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
1457:02:02, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
1436:01:56, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
1420:01:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
1397:17:48, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
1375:15:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
1358:01:23, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
1343:01:02, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
1329:22:36, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
1311:22:24, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
1272:18:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
1251:18:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
1236:17:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
1221:16:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
223:WikiProject Severe weather
188:project's importance scale
1568:20:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
1549:14:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
1534:01:23, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
1196:14:45, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
1182:04:13, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
1154:14:45, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
1139:13:19, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
1118:18:17, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
1103:17:52, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
1088:17:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
1074:17:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
1053:17:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
1011:21:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
997:21:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
983:21:08, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
960:21:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
926:14:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
912:16:00, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
880:12:44, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
859:13:01, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
837:19:04, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
810:03:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
795:03:12, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
779:04:16, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
739:04:07, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
722:03:59, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
662:03:50, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
646:03:43, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
625:03:08, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
610:03:01, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
586:02:33, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
565:00:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
555:It is the same location.
550:00:34, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
203:
181:
73:
64:Thunderstorms / Tornadoes
46:
1935:C-Class Weather articles
1847:per proposal reasoning.
597:outbreak, or the recent
107:, which collaborates on
1558:support an EF5 rating.
306:Meteorological synopsis
1886:
536:Johnson County tornado
200:
28:This article is rated
1881:
1206:Ulmer tornado section
648:TornadoInformation12
588:TornadoInformation12
199:
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1663:Weather Event Writer
1584:TornadoInformation12
797:TornadoInformation12
787:TornadoInformation12
741:TornadoInformation12
731:TornadoInformation12
638:TornadoInformation12
578:TornadoInformation12
437:Non-tornadic impacts
1721:User:Hurricane Noah
1466:TropicalAnalystwx13
865:Pebroke Radar Image
349:Confirmed tornadoes
273:
104:WikiProject Weather
1616:I propose merging
1367:TheVulkyrianEmpire
267:
201:
122:Articles Requested
34:content assessment
1867:
1802:
1786:comment added by
1770:
1719:Speaking of that
1623:this conversation
1489:making it again.
1478:
1428:United States Man
1389:United States Man
1350:United States Man
1321:United States Man
1290:United States Man
1228:United States Man
1188:United States Man
1161:United States Man
1146:United States Man
1080:United States Man
943:United States Man
916:ok, sounds good.
654:United States Man
617:United States Man
557:United States Man
533:
532:
528:
527:
524:
523:
268:Section size for
242:
241:
238:
237:
234:
233:
127:Project Resources
1967:
1913:
1864:created articles
1853:
1819:
1766:
1582:
1468:
1293:
1164:
1032:
946:
425:
410:
395:
380:
365:
337:
322:
274:
256:
251:
250:
244:
217:
215:Tornadoes portal
212:
211:
210:
170:
169:
168:Weather articles
166:
163:
160:
98:
93:
92:
82:
75:
74:
69:
66:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
1975:
1974:
1970:
1969:
1968:
1966:
1965:
1964:
1925:
1924:
1912:
1902:
1813:
1809:
1614:
1572:
1512:
1408:Support section
1308:
1287:
1284:
1208:
1158:
1126:
1050:
1026:
1023:
940:
938:
891:2011 Tuscaloosa
867:
573:
538:
529:
421:
406:
391:
376:
361:
333:
318:
261:
248:
213:
208:
206:
167:
164:
161:
158:
157:
156:
132:Become a Member
94:
87:
67:
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
1973:
1971:
1963:
1962:
1957:
1952:
1947:
1942:
1937:
1927:
1926:
1923:
1922:
1908:
1897:
1896:
1888:
1887:
1871:
1850:Sir MemeGod :D
1842:
1825:
1824:
1823:
1811:
1775:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1725:74.101.118.218
1703:
1702:
1701:
1674:
1673:
1613:
1612:Merge proposal
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1511:
1508:
1483:
1482:
1459:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1404:
1403:
1402:
1401:
1400:
1399:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1304:
1283:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1207:
1204:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1125:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1105:
1090:
1076:
1046:
1022:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1014:
1013:
937:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
898:
897:
896:
895:
883:
882:
866:
863:
862:
861:
847:
846:
845:
844:
843:
842:
841:
840:
839:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
813:
812:
798:
784:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
728:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
694:
693:
692:
691:
671:
670:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
635:
631:
572:
569:
568:
567:
537:
534:
531:
530:
526:
525:
522:
521:
518:
515:
511:
510:
507:
504:
502:External links
498:
497:
494:
491:
485:
484:
481:
478:
472:
471:
468:
465:
459:
458:
455:
452:
446:
445:
442:
439:
433:
432:
429:
426:
418:
417:
414:
411:
403:
402:
399:
396:
388:
387:
384:
381:
373:
372:
369:
366:
358:
357:
354:
351:
345:
344:
341:
338:
330:
329:
326:
323:
315:
314:
311:
308:
302:
301:
298:
295:
289:
288:
286:
283:
281:
278:
272:(16 sections)
263:
262:
259:
254:
252:
240:
239:
236:
235:
232:
231:
228:Low-importance
219:
218:
202:
192:
191:
184:Low-importance
180:
174:
173:
171:
155:
154:
149:
144:
139:
134:
129:
124:
118:
100:
99:
96:Weather portal
83:
71:
70:
68:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1972:
1961:
1958:
1956:
1953:
1951:
1948:
1946:
1943:
1941:
1938:
1936:
1933:
1932:
1930:
1921:
1917:
1911:
1907:
1906:
1899:
1898:
1894:
1891:Additionally
1890:
1889:
1885:
1879:
1875:
1872:
1870:
1865:
1861:
1857:
1852:
1851:
1846:
1843:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1826:
1822:
1818:
1815:
1807:
1804:
1803:
1801:
1797:
1793:
1789:
1785:
1779:
1776:
1774:
1769:
1764:
1763:Hurricanehink
1760:
1757:
1756:
1749:
1746:
1742:
1741:
1736:
1735:
1734:
1730:
1726:
1722:
1718:
1717:
1716:
1713:
1709:
1708:
1704:
1699:
1694:
1690:
1686:
1681:
1678:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1672:
1669:
1665:
1664:
1658:
1654:
1650:
1647:
1646:
1645:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1627:Mike Christie
1624:
1619:
1611:
1603:
1599:
1596:
1593:
1589:
1585:
1580:
1579:Elijahandskip
1576:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1557:
1554:evidence did
1552:
1551:
1550:
1546:
1542:
1541:Elijahandskip
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1526:Elijahandskip
1523:
1518:
1515:
1509:
1507:
1506:
1502:
1499:
1496:
1492:
1488:
1481:
1476:
1475:contributions
1472:
1467:
1463:
1460:
1458:
1454:
1450:
1449:Cyclonebiskit
1446:
1443:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1412:Elijahandskip
1409:
1406:
1405:
1398:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1331:
1330:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1307:
1302:
1301:
1300:
1291:
1281:
1273:
1269:
1266:
1263:
1259:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1248:
1244:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1205:
1197:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1184:
1183:
1179:
1176:
1173:
1169:
1162:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1106:
1104:
1100:
1096:
1091:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1075:
1071:
1068:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1049:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1036:
1030:
1020:
1012:
1008:
1004:
1000:
999:
998:
994:
990:
986:
985:
984:
980:
976:
972:
968:
964:
963:
962:
961:
957:
953:
950:
944:
935:
927:
923:
919:
915:
914:
913:
909:
905:
902:
901:
900:
899:
892:
887:
886:
885:
884:
881:
877:
873:
869:
868:
864:
860:
856:
852:
848:
838:
834:
831:
828:
824:
819:
811:
807:
803:
799:
796:
792:
788:
785:
782:
781:
780:
776:
772:
767:
766:
765:
764:
763:
762:
761:
760:
759:
758:
757:
756:
755:
754:
740:
736:
732:
729:
725:
724:
723:
719:
715:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:
705:
704:
703:
702:
701:
688:
685:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
673:
672:
663:
659:
655:
650:
649:
647:
643:
639:
636:
632:
628:
627:
626:
622:
618:
613:
612:
611:
608:
604:
600:
596:
591:
590:
589:
587:
583:
579:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
553:
552:
551:
547:
543:
535:
519:
516:
513:
512:
508:
505:
503:
500:
499:
495:
492:
490:
487:
486:
482:
479:
477:
474:
473:
469:
466:
464:
461:
460:
456:
453:
451:
448:
447:
443:
440:
438:
435:
434:
430:
427:
424:
420:
419:
415:
412:
409:
408:April 7 event
405:
404:
400:
397:
394:
393:April 6 event
390:
389:
385:
382:
379:
378:April 5 event
375:
374:
370:
367:
364:
363:April 4 event
360:
359:
355:
352:
350:
347:
346:
342:
339:
336:
332:
331:
327:
324:
321:
317:
316:
312:
309:
307:
304:
303:
299:
296:
294:
291:
290:
284:
279:
276:
275:
271:
265:
264:
260:Section sizes
258:
257:
253:
246:
245:
229:
226:(assessed as
225:
224:
216:
205:
198:
194:
193:
189:
185:
179:
176:
175:
172:
153:
150:
148:
145:
143:
140:
138:
135:
133:
130:
128:
125:
123:
120:
119:
117:for details.
116:
112:
111:
106:
105:
97:
91:
86:
84:
81:
77:
76:
72:
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1909:
1903:
1882:
1873:
1849:
1844:
1827:
1805:
1782:— Preceding
1777:
1758:
1739:
1706:
1679:
1660:
1648:
1615:
1594:
1555:
1519:
1516:
1513:
1497:
1486:
1484:
1461:
1444:
1407:
1316:
1297:
1296:
1285:
1264:
1209:
1174:
1127:
1066:
1039:
1038:
1024:
971:this warning
939:
829:
595:January 2020
574:
539:
277:Section name
221:
183:
137:Project Talk
115:project page
108:
102:
40:WikiProjects
1893:WP:SIZERULE
1685:WP:SIZERULE
1335:Lolkikmoddi
1299:MarioProtIV
1041:MarioProtIV
1929:Categories
1689:WP:OVERLAP
1668:Talk Page)
1653:WP:LASTING
1575:TornadoLGS
1560:TornadoLGS
1095:TornadoLGS
1003:TornadoLGS
975:TornadoLGS
918:Jalen bell
571:Premature?
542:TornadoLGS
489:References
142:Assessment
1588:ChessEric
1491:ChessEric
1282:Allendale
1258:ChessEric
1243:Wikiwillz
1213:Wikiwillz
1168:ChessEric
1131:Wikiwillz
1110:Wikiwillz
1060:ChessEric
1029:ChessEric
989:Wikiwillz
952:Wikiwillz
851:Wikiwillz
823:ChessEric
450:Aftermath
335:April 6–7
320:April 4–5
1910:(he/him)
1878:WP:Merge
1860:contribs
1796:contribs
1784:unsigned
1698:WP:UNDUE
1635:contribs
1598:contribs
1501:contribs
1306:contribs
1268:contribs
1178:contribs
1070:contribs
1048:contribs
1035:WP:SYNTH
833:contribs
520:115,727
463:See also
1905:DJ Cane
1845:Support
1832:Hoguert
1828:Comment
1806:Support
1788:Hoguert
1759:Support
1680:Support
1639:library
1021:April 6
973:, USM?
517:115,727
401:15,008
386:62,396
356:91,859
313:11,451
285:Section
186:on the
159:Weather
147:A-Class
110:weather
59:Weather
30:C-class
1884:topic.
1874:Oppose
1778:Oppose
1649:Oppose
1487:oppose
1462:Oppose
1445:Oppose
1317:Oppose
904:Mjeims
802:Mjeims
771:Mjeims
714:Mjeims
603:Mjeims
509:1,093
457:1,663
444:5,956
431:5,735
416:2,538
398:15,008
383:62,396
371:6,053
343:3,012
328:8,411
300:3,383
287:total
152:Alerts
36:scale.
967:WP:RS
684:first
514:Total
506:1,093
476:Notes
454:1,663
441:5,956
428:5,735
413:2,538
368:6,053
340:3,012
325:8,411
297:3,383
293:(Top)
282:count
1916:Talk
1901:one.
1856:talk
1836:talk
1792:talk
1768:talk
1745:BSBA
1740:Noah
1729:talk
1712:BSBA
1707:Noah
1661:The
1631:talk
1592:talk
1577:and
1564:talk
1545:talk
1530:talk
1495:talk
1471:talk
1453:chat
1432:talk
1416:talk
1393:talk
1371:talk
1354:talk
1339:talk
1325:talk
1262:talk
1247:talk
1232:talk
1217:talk
1192:talk
1172:talk
1150:talk
1135:talk
1114:talk
1099:talk
1084:talk
1064:talk
1007:talk
993:talk
979:talk
956:talk
949:here
922:talk
908:talk
876:talk
855:talk
827:talk
806:talk
791:talk
775:talk
735:talk
718:talk
658:talk
642:talk
621:talk
607:talk
582:talk
561:talk
546:talk
470:258
280:Byte
1771:)
1637:-
1556:not
894:on.
687:two
496:30
483:34
467:258
353:129
178:Low
1931::
1918:)
1880::
1862:-
1858:-
1838:)
1817:'S
1798:)
1794:•
1743:,
1731:)
1710:,
1641:)
1633:-
1625:.
1600:)
1566:)
1547:)
1532:)
1524:.
1503:)
1473:·
1455:)
1434:)
1418:)
1395:)
1373:)
1356:)
1341:)
1327:)
1309:)
1303:(/
1270:)
1249:)
1234:)
1219:)
1211:--
1194:)
1180:)
1152:)
1137:)
1129:--
1116:)
1101:)
1086:)
1072:)
1051:)
1045:(/
1009:)
995:)
981:)
958:)
924:)
910:)
878:)
857:)
835:)
808:)
793:)
777:)
737:)
720:)
660:)
644:)
623:)
584:)
563:)
548:)
493:30
480:34
310:28
230:).
62::
1914:(
1866:)
1854:(
1834:(
1814:Z
1812:Z
1790:(
1765:(
1727:(
1666:(
1629:(
1595:·
1590:(
1581::
1573:@
1562:(
1543:(
1528:(
1498:·
1493:(
1477:)
1469:(
1451:(
1430:(
1414:(
1391:(
1369:(
1352:(
1337:(
1323:(
1292::
1288:@
1265:·
1260:(
1245:(
1230:(
1215:(
1190:(
1175:·
1170:(
1163::
1159:@
1148:(
1133:(
1112:(
1097:(
1082:(
1067:·
1062:(
1031::
1027:@
1005:(
991:(
977:(
954:(
945::
941:@
920:(
906:(
874:(
853:(
830:·
825:(
804:(
789:(
773:(
733:(
716:(
656:(
640:(
619:(
605:(
580:(
559:(
544:(
190:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
