Talk:Non-Tropical Effects of Hurricane Katrina

Merger Propsal and Tag

The point of putting a merge proposal on a new page is to discuss its merger. Removing the tag is deprecated. If want to argue against merger, please do so but do not remove the tag again. Meanwhile, the merger was proposed because the article looked too short to stand on its own. However, on fixing your ref tags (they should be <ref>.....</ref>) the article now shows more as it should, and I have removed the merge tag. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 17:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

will doJuliancolton 19:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I redirected it. There's no new information here - everything that's here is in either Hurricane Katrina effects by region or Hurricane Katrina itself. --Coredesat 02:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

There is alot of new information here. And even if it does you would have to go to several different articles. I just think that this article shoud stay.

P.S. if you ever have any real reason to merge this article with [[Hurricane Katrina, tell me why on this talk page, before you just do it. :-) Juliancolton 13:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

We don't do this for any other storms, and this is not "non-tropical" impact; virtually all of this is direct or indirect impact from Katrina while it was still a tropical cyclone. The actual non-tropical damage is insignificant compared to the tropical damage, and doesn't need mentioning. --Coredesat 05:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, there is no such thing as a "non-tropical hurricane". Hurricanes are, by definition, tropical cyclones. --Coredesat 05:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

FIne then, what do you think would be a better title than "non-tropical"? Juliancolton 14:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The article isn't needed. All of the information exists elsewhere. --Hurricanehink (talk) 17:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)