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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma articles
Looks like tornado activity is supposed to continue through the weekend. This will probably need to be expanded and could wind up becoming a sequence. Just throwing this out here (I know it is
WP:CRYSTAL).
United States Man (
talk)
22:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)reply
For the record, SPC is saying that they suspect that the day with the biggest tornado potential is actually going to be Monday; the models are too divergent from Tuesday on to make Day 6 through Day 8 forecasts, but there should be plenty of "fuel" for further outbreaks on Tuesday and Wednesday, too. Let's keep an eye on things...
rdfox 76 (
talk)
23:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)reply
Please refrain from non-article related discussions on this page. Talk pages meant for constructive conversations on how to improve the article, and not to be used as a forum (
WP:FORUM).
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
23:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)reply
As for TWC's info, BTW, SPC's D4-8 Outlook indicates that the biggest severe weather day overall will be Sunday, but the tornado threat is bigger on Monday. However, given that both of these were in the D4-8 outlook at least as of Wednesday, I suspect we're in for something big on both days--large forecast areas that far out tend to indicate that HIGH risk issuances are likely when they come around to D1 and even D2...
rdfox 76 (
talk)
01:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC)reply
I would like to note, though, in that regard that two outbreaks in April this year were not as significant as the day 4-8 outlooks seemed to imply, so I wouldn't set my expectations too high.
TornadoLGS (
talk)
04:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)reply
Shouldn't we make it a sequence. Mainly because there were tornadoes associated with both systems on the same day. Making two different articles would cause confusion.
United States Man (
talk)
19:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)reply
It's easy to differentiate the tornadoes from the two systems, they didn't occur in the same general area in quick succession. It's also better to keep this outbreak separate due to its notability in Texas (from a technical standpoint, outbreaks did not occur from this system on 5/16 and 5/17 as six tornadoes did not touch down).
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
19:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)reply
What do you mean by "six tornadoes did not touch down"? Anyway, if you don't want to make it a sequence then the new article should start today (the 18th) and the TX, MN, and NE tornadoes from the 17th should be left out. If it is made a sequence, then those can be included as well.
United States Man (
talk)
19:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)reply
As a general rule of thumb, a tornado outbreak is defined as at least six to ten tornadoes touching down over the course of less than 12 hours (not exactly sure on the exact duration, 12 is a rough estimate). For it to be a tornado outbreak sequence, there would have to be a string of these outbreaks with no more than a day in between them. With May 15 being an outbreak, the three days between that and the expected event today would be too long. I'm not exactly sure how related yesterday's TX tornadoes were but the ones in NE and MN are related to the upcoming event and should be mentioned. It's fine if the article dates overlap since they're different events.
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
19:51, 18 May 2013 (UTC)reply
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure about the tornadoes from yesterday either, there were a whole bunch of low rolling around. I'm fine either way about including them or not, though this seems like it'll mostly be a large hail event.
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
19:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)reply
When I checked, it looked like this forecast severe weather is from the same slow-moving system. So should this count as an outbreak sequence article if Sunday and Monday turn out to be significant?
TornadoLGS (
talk)
04:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)reply
According to Cyclonebiskit, it would not be a sequence because May 16 and 17 were small events. So we would start a new outbreak page, assuming there is not a forecast fail over the next two days.
United States Man (
talk)
04:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)reply
If it's the same system May 18-20 (as suggested by the forecasts) would be a single tornado outbreak per previous wiki articles. A sequence would be two or more defined systems producing outbreaks in rapid succession that are relatively difficult to differentiate whereas this would be a single system producing back-to-back outbreaks, generally considered one overall outbreak. The tornadoes listed in this article are easy to tell apart from the other system so it can be kept a separate event.
Cyclonebiskit (
talk)
04:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)reply