Jump to content

Talk:2022–2023 California floods

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 100.12.169.218 (talk) at 21:06, 17 March 2023. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Year should not be abbreviated

20 out of 20 of the multiple year floods listed on List of floods do not abbreviate the latter year to two digits and the policy in WP:NUMBERS seems to be pretty clear that years should not be abbreviated. (Since it is linked on the same page, I'll mention that there are some exceptions such as 2022–23 North American winter, but that seems to be done that way to be consistent with NOAA naming.) Daniel Quinlan (talk) 01:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deadliest of 2023 so far?

This sentence (last line of 1st paragraph of lede) should be deleted. It will be meaningless very soon. The source is dated January 10, and I think it would be a spectacular year if that record holds much longer. The lede isn't a place for this. It's a meaningless statistic that makes the death toll sound more significant than it is. Deaths are always awful and significant, but this ranking only 10 days into the year is not significant, and it's not part of the story. Dcs002 (talk) 22:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was alerted to this discussion on my talk page, so I thought I would chime in. At the present time, the floods rank the deadliest meteorological event in 2023. I hope not, but probably within a few weeks, it will drop to number 2 in the world. As brought up by Dcs002, it would be meaningless to mention it being the 2nd deadliest in the world. That said, for a few months at least, I think it will remain the deadliest U.S. meteorological event in 2023. Once it drops to number 2 globally, the wording should be changed for the U.S. deadliest event. If it drops to number 2 on both of them, then that part should be taken out completely, but while it remains the deadliest in the world and/or US, that sentence does have a significant and true meaning. Elijahandskip (talk) 23:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, this seems to me to be promotion of his own templates. We’re 4% over with the year. I seriously doubt 19 deaths is the deadliest of the year, although it could be in the top five. Still, though, unless it holds out long enough to be picked up in a reliable source, it shouldn’t count. 69.127.228.206 (talk) 21:17, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you believe that statement violates the no original research policy, then a discussion should be started since you would be saying Template:Deadliest meteorological events in 2023 violates the policy as well. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thats WP:POINTy. The template itself is fine since it compares events as covered by sources. But we shouldn’t extrapolate that in text. Having said that I will take this to the WP:ORN. 69.127.228.206 (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Courtesy link: Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard § 2022-2023 California floods Tails Wx 21:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the template is fine, then why is it not allowed to be stated in the article? Just saying… Elijahandskip (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 March 2023

2022–2023 California floodsDecember 2022–January 2023 California floods – The article makes it sound like it covers all floods in California in 2022 and 2023. There are currently the March 2023 California floods, and that plus the floods in California in July/august 2022 make me skeptical to believe this is truly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of all floods in California from 2022 to 2023. 100.12.169.218 (talk) 21:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]