Talk:List of tornadoes in the 2011 Super Outbreak

Hackleburg

According to [1], the Hackleburg tornado was an EF3+ with wind speeds of at least 180 miles an hour. For those of you who are familiar with the enhanced Fujita scale (which I believe is most of you), I think you already see the problem. So, what are we to put in the article? Do we assume they put down the wrong wind speed, the wrong rating, or do we do something else entirely? Discuss. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 20:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

As for my own personal thoughts, I believe it would be a lot easier to typo from EF4+ to EF3+ than it would be to typo from anywhere from 165- mph to 180 mph. I'm still hesitant to put in in the article though. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 21:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Please post replies on the talk page of the main outbreak article, as that's where I posted this first. I am just putting this here to make those of you who might check this talk page aware. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 21:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The tornado has been upgraded to an EF5: http://forecast.weather.gov/product.php?site=BMX&product=PNS&issuedby=BMX Sqlman (talk) 23:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

This tornado should be consolidated with the Phil Campbell and Mount Hope to Hatton storms per [2]. I won't have time to grab that report and integrate it into the storm description for awhile. -- ke4roh (talk) 03:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done -- ke4roh (talk) 02:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

April 25?

Hey, who put those ratings up for April 25? Ratings on those tornadoes are wrong. Memphis never rated the Crockett/Collierville storms and Nashville never rated Stewart. You need to cite your ratings... tornadoes did occur but they have rated them yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.50.95.2 (talk) 22:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

No answer? This is false information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.50.95.2 (talk) 23:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

problom

is the Tuscaloosa to Birmingham tornado ever goan be rated? its ben 4 days and its stil a EF? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freiza667 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

It has been less than three days, but yes, it is taking longer than usual. It has been preliminarily as EF3 or higher, but that is the only information available; the survey has not been completed over its (likely) 100+ mile path. [3] It is an extraordinary situation, and I'm sure they want to make sure the survey is done correctly.-RunningOnBrains^(talk) 08:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Preliminary rating of at least EF4 - [4] Inferno, Lord of Penguins 15:53, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Time in table

Shouldn't the times in the chart/table be in the # : ## Format. ie no leading 0(zero) and : between hours and minutes?
See Wikipedia:MOS#Times and WP:MOSNUM#Chronological items- 220.101 talk^\Contribs 05:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree, but looking at other tornado articles, it doesn't seem to be the convention. Is there any reason these times are using the 24 hour clock? Per Wikipedia:MOS#Times, it should be dictated "by context", but that's not so clear. Foofish (talk) 02:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but my guess is that it's because the NWS reports it that way, though I'm not sure it's local or Zulu time. rdfox 76 (talk) 02:40, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Storm Prediction Center preliminary reports and NCDC Storm events, which are our two main sources for tornado events, are both formatted this way, so it's usually much easier than trying to figure out local time and subtract out hours and daylight savings time, etc. I'm not endorsing it, just offering explanation; I couldn't care less either way, as long as we're consistent. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 22:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

another confirmed tornado

another EF1 tornado hit Putnam and Hancock Counties in Georgia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.36.199.145 (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

in-line citations

in-line citations should be added for all tornadoes; the list of sources at the bottom of each day's events is not the best method of referencing - as it forces anyone checking the accuracy (and updatedness) of any tornado to try to figure out where the confirmatory source may be found. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

combine?

Smithville (MS) tornado is the same as the Shottsville (AL) one. NWS satellite analysis Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Tornado numbers

I've changed this twice, so I feel it deserves further discussion. This article from NOAA was published yesterday and contains a preliminary count of significant tornadoes. Someone has added these numbers to the tornado chart instead of using the numbers we have here. I believe this is wrong, but more importantly inconsistent. First off, there's nothing to say that their higher numbers aren't wrong. Secondly, and more likely IMHO, those numbers were correct, but now since many tornadoes split between different Weather Forecast Offices are being consolidated, they have since gone down. I believe it is more consistent and correct to use our numbers which we have compiled from the various National Weather Service office sources for the total number of tornadoes. However, I am willing to listen to dissenting opinions. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 07:09, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I also wouldn't put it down as original research because NWS did that when they went to look at the damage. We're effectively collating and compiling their reports, then counting our compilation. I do have some concern that we have missed a significant tornado. My concern stems mostly from my haphazard method of collecting and summarizing survey reports and my particular myopic focus on North Alabama. I don't know what other techniques there might be for assessing the completeness of our summary. BHM put out a helpful summary listing each tornado surveyed, numbered, and then a track map showed ones they had yet to survey. HUN, on the other hand, has been focused exclusively on individual surveys. I have yet to see an outbreak summary listing tornadoes and survey summary or clear explanation of where else they're planning to survey. -- ke4roh (talk) 16:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Watch for confirmed tornadoes

The past two days, I've added a slew of confirmed weaker tornadoes from the Shevreport, Atlanta, Little Rock, Knoxville and Jackson offices (probably a few others) though I did had the chance to look at DFW, the Carolina and Virginia and areas further north. So just be on the lookout for continous numerous confirmations, I didn't update the tornado count (I've lost the count anyways because there were too many), but it might be over 200 confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.130.155.90 (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Again today added confirmations from Shreveport, Jackson, Nashville, Dallas, Atlanta and Wakefield. Probably 30 or so tornadoes I've added today —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.130.155.90 (talk) 23:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

And we appreciate your efforts! I've been trying to keep up but I've really only been checking Alabama and Tennessee. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 04:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Today I've added more from DFW as well as Huntsville, Paducah, Little Rock, State College and Washington D.C offices. So probably I've added another 25 or so tornadoes confirmed especially from the DFW office.66.130.155.90 (talk) 22:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Ringgold tornado

After looking through the NWS reports and their recently published map for the outbreak, I can definitely say that the EF4 Ringgold tornado started in Georgia and not Alabama (listed as starting in DeKalb CO in the article). I'd rather let someone who has a good grasp on the structure of this list rather than jump into this mess myself. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

That sure seems to be true per NWS Peachtree, GA. However, we should definitely not make conclusions based on the large map; it is not completely up to date and has several errors (see, for instance, the Smithville EF5; they only have a short stretch in Mississippi, while we know from subsequent surveys that it continued into Alabama). -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 04:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed, by the way. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 00:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect times

MANY confirmed tornadoes on here have incorrect times. There are several where the person who added it simply miscalculated for UTC-to-local conversion, and some others where I have no idea what the person was doing. I am going to fix out-of-order ones, but I really don't have time to go through all 200 confirmed tornadoes to check the time. So others, just keep an eye out please.

Helpful note for future reference: to get UTC add 5 hours to local time for central time zone (TX, LA, MS, AL, Tennessee--ONLY Memphis and Nahsville WFOs) and add 4 hours for eastern time zone (all others). Check out File:National-atlas-us-time-zones.png if you are unsure. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 05:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

NWS Morristown is actually in both EDT and CDT, they specify the time zone though so unless someone just glances at the time and assumes, there shouldn't be an issues. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Tornados In KY April 27.

There were 2 torndo touchdowns in Kentucky on April 27. http://www.crh.noaa.gov/lmk/?n=apr27_2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.172.48.144 (talk) 22:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Duplicated EF4's?

NWS Morristown seems to show one EF4 in and around the Bledsoe County area. Both EF4 entries in the table seems to show the same number of fatalities which gives me an impression that it is a duplication or maybe it's the NWS that forgot to indicate the track. The hour-differential is 5 hours between the two, so one of them might have the CDT time instead of UTC. Will wait for comments before removing if it's actually a duplicated entry. 66.130.155.90 (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Yea, the one that was listed as Graysville was a duplicate of the Dunlap tornado. I've corrected the table to remove that duplicate. I'm not sure what was up with the times though, it touched down at 8:30 pm CDT which is 0130 UTC. The person who originally added it probably assumed it was EDT since Morristown is mostly in that time zone. Thanks for bringing this up. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:18, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem, the Glade Spring tornado might have been duplicated as well, I'm not sure, the two 0515 UTC (Glade Spring was marked as 0112) have different ratings and path lengths and one of them haas an extra county affected. NWS Morristown only marks an EF3 and a nearby EF1 in the vicinity. The two 0515 ratings were rated EF2 and EF3. 66.130.155.90 (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Cordova area

There seems to be a second tornado during the morning that have probably struck some of the same or close to the same areas that were hit later by the EF4 in the afternoon. Initially I thought it was a time mistake by NWS BMX since they gave that tornado a possible EF4 rating but it looks to be a separate one. THE PNS said at least EF3 because of a home that was swept off its foundation near the start of the track. They have been listed separately so far. Many of the morning tornadoes have hit areas close to the afternoon tracks so it might confuse some. 66.130.155.90 (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Table clean-up

As you have might noticed, I've fixed the tables in chronological orders per state affected by first tornadoes and also put all the individual tornadoes per state in chronological order as there were a lot of mixed-up. I haven't touched the ones with the unknown times in some of the states for now. Also, I've removed a bunch of EF? entries especially in Alabama where they might have well being already confirmed as part of longer tornado tracks especially the ones in western/northern Alabama. Finally I don't know what's the problem with reference 54 but it is given an error in the footnotes. 66.130.155.90 (talk) 17:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

NWS Morristown

Okay, because that NWS office this is really messing up the table on the 27th. A lot of their surveys does not include the length nor the time. The Tennesseee list probably has close to 15-20 tornadoes with unknown paths and/or times. There might have been some duplications or I forgot some or some have their EF scales changed. I don't known right now, it is all messed up and before today I've actually relied on their PNS bulletins. Eventually, I guess this will be sorted up once the data will be finalized in a few months once it will be in the NCDC. 66.130.155.90 (talk) 21:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

This article and the main article may not be fully finalized until after the NCDC reports come in this summer, I agree. I did some cleanup to get everything standardized. Due to the highly uncertain and messy nature, I am not going to include these in List of United States tornadoes in April 2011 until then, just add the numbers to the already-existing numbers. The total is highly uncertain for sure. CrazyC83 (talk) 01:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Meanwhille in NWS Huntsville territory

Meanwhile in Marshall and Madison Counties in Alabama, I have completely lost track of the number of tornadoes in both of those counties, so it is possible that there might have been duplications.66.130.155.90 (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Pisgah Alabama family hit twice in ten hours

I am having difficulty determining which tornadoes in the table are referenced by this Associated Press news story: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2011-05-01-Severe%20Weather-Two%20Twister%20Family/id-213464c420e341da807ce4c89748f519

Two separate tornadoes followed the same path in Jackson County on April 27th, striking ten hours apart, the first one killing a woman, the second one killing two more relatives. In the interval between the two killer tornadoes, a third tornado passed the same overhead without touching down.

Any ideas which tornadoes in the table correspond to this AP story?

This item says the first victim died in the morning of April 27th: http://blog.al.com/ht/2011/05/kathy_gray_haney_pisgah_tornad.html

It seems like these details would merit mention in the table, if I knew the correct tornadoes associated with the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Biturica (talk • contribs) 21:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

At this point, I wouldn't rely too much on national media stories. Best to stick to local media and NWS surveys. CrazyC83 (talk) 14:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Calamine, AR in Sharp County on April 26... not a tornado

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.srh.noaa.gov%2Fimages%2Flzk%2Fpdf%2FStormsof2011.pdf LZK never added it to their list and said in an events article that it was strong winds and not a torado. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.26.145 (talk) 02:39, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Date Inconsistencies

I noticed that this article lists a few killer tornadoes on April 28, but the SPC annual fatal tornado summary lists these tornadoes on April 27. Why are the same tornadoes listed on different dates? TornadoLGS (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I checked the NWS for these tornadoes and I found that they were on the 28th. I'm not sure why the SPC lists them on the 27th. United States Man (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Fix?

There are several script errors in the April 27 and 28 tables regarding path length and touchdown coordinates. They look fine when you're in the editing window, but as soon as you save the page it gives the errors. The April 25 and 26 tables do not have this problem. Anybody know how to fix it? TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem is as far as formatting goes, but something is messing this up. Could it be that the page is too long? United States Man (talk) 20:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I went to edit the whole page and got this message, "Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included." So yes, the article is probably too long. Any ideas about what can be done? TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 20:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I would take out April 25 and 26 and move them to a new page titled "List of tornadoes on April 25-26, 2011" or something in that manner. Then, rename this page the same way as the new page (except for the specific dates). I will then figure out what to do with the table at the top and I will add some links to the outbreak article and do some moving around. United States Man (talk) 20:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

But first, let's figure out a good name (I really don't like my above suggestion). Do you have any ideas? United States Man (talk) 20:59, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I honestly have no idea, this has never happened before. Best I have is something like "April 25-28, 2011 event (Part 1)" and "April 25-28, 2011 event (Part 2)". But I doubt that would work. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 21:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Should we start an RFC? United States Man (talk) 21:22, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

That's probably the best option. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

It's March 1st and the table is still a mess. Is anything being done to fix this?184.58.26.140 (talk) 21:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)Sharkguy05

The issue has been sent to WP:RfC. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of tornadoes in the 2011 Super Outbreak. 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://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/orders/IPS/IPS-365AE391-42D1-432E-86E8-60949C642469.pdf

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:15, 4 July 2016 (UTC)