WikiProject Severe Weather
WikiProject Severe weather was founded back on May 7, 2007, during an active time of severe weather in the United States (see May 2007 tornado outbreak). The project's core article is Severe weather. Early members included User:Runningonbrains, User:CrazyC83, User:WxGopher, and User:Evolauxia. The WikiProject had a period of high activity until 2009, when an unusually slow severe weather season most likely contributed to a decline in activity. Despite the low levels of activity, I managed to find a couple of editors for this interview.
1. First, tell us a bit about yourself and your involvement in WikiProject Severe Weather.
- I first became involved in 2005–06, after spinning off in general weather. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I added myself to the project due to involvement in the general meteorology articles which overlapped the project. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
2. When did you first join WikiProject Severe Weather? What are some of the challenges that the project has met since you joined, and how were they dealt with?
- I developed it before the project. The challenges are keeping everything up to date and accurate given the high number of updates needed especially during peak season, and keeping up with major events. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Soon after it started. The tornado and severe weather articles are those I've been most involved with in regards to collaboration with others. The severe weather article editing/improvement has been at a near standstill since last fall, due to a lack of agreement in the overall article structure and which sections may need to be removed. Therefore, my experience is mixed. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
3. What aspects of the project do you consider to be particularly successful? Has the project developed any unusual innovations, or uniquely adopted any common approaches?
- Probably the biggest innovation was profiling EVERY isolated event in the US. I started that in January 2009. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- The improvement of individual non-tropical storm-related articles are a success of this project and the non-tropical storms project. Before this project started, it was left up to me and one or two others to create these articles. Now that the two projects have gotten involved in individual storm-related articles, it frees me take a backseat and improve the meteorology-related articles. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
4. Have any major initiatives by the project ended unsuccessfully? What lessons have you learned from them?
- Not that I am aware of. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- The severe weather article, by far. The article collaboration improvement drive failed with that one. Since there's no apparent resolution, there is nothing to learn yet from that failure. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
5. What experiences have you had with the WikiProjects whose scopes overlap with yours, in particular the Tropical Cyclone, Meteorology, and Non-Tropical Storms WikiProjects? Has your project developed particularly close relationships with any other WikiProjects?
- I work with WP:TROP as well, but don't do a lot elsewhere. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I've done much work with the tropical and met projects, mainly to the meteorology-centered articles. I have contributed to more individual hurricane/tropical cyclone articles than severe articles due to my background. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
6. What is WikiProject Severe Weather's plan of attack for this year's northern hemisphere severe weather season?
- Keep doing what has been done lately, and build from 2009. If changes are needed, we will know in the spring when things pick up. International activity needs more sources to build on, as the lack of reliable sources hurt such from becoming global. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have no idea. If it were up to me, improving the existing articles to at least GA class would be primary before starting on new articles. There's a tendency in all of the met-related projects to leave existing articles alone and rush to create new ones. If the severe weather project did the reverse, imagine the quality that would be present in the existing articles. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
7. What is your vision for the project? How do you see the project itself, as well as the articles within its scope, developing over the coming seasons?
- I see this becoming global, but we need more resources from elsewhere in the world. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- If the quality of the articles within the project improves, it will attract more editors all by itself. Success begets success. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
8. In connection with the question above, several of the editors on the WikiProject's member list seem to have gone inactive, and only four editors have signed themselves as active in the project since the beginning of 2009. Is the WikiProject running low on active members, and if so, is there anything you envision that could be done to help capture more active contributors?
- Well, the inactive 2009 season may have slowed things down, but we still get plenty of contributions from non-members. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- This is true in all the met-related projects. A year or two ago, I would say a problem we had in the TC project was inadvertently scaring away new editors due to a fundamental lack of wikipedia-related knowledge on the part of new editors. As long as the severe weather project is welcoming in regards to new editors, and helpful towards steering them to the proper guidelines, it will grow naturally/organically, like the TC project did in 2006 and 2007. Thegreatdr (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
You'll want to grab a cup of coffee for next week's report. Until then, feel free to sit back, relax, and catch up on the previous editions of WikiProject Report in the archive.
Make sure we cover what matters to you — leave a suggestion