Wikipedia

Talk:Tornado outbreak of June 19, 1951

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Sammi Brie in topic GA Review
Learn more about this page
Good articleTornado outbreak of June 19, 1951 has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 26, 2022Good article nomineeNot listed
September 6, 2022Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago32 comments2 people in discussion
Unsuccessful. Newspaper sourcing revealed substantial issues with US environmental information that required a section rewrite. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tornado outbreak of June 19, 1951/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 21:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Copy changes needed throughout. The last section is quite dense and needs to be broken up and better organized. 7-day hold to ChessEric. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 21:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Copy changes edit

Lead edit

Synopsis edit

  • Decapitalize "northeastern" (but not Central as a recognized region)

Confirmed tornadoes edit

  • Remove comma after "CDNS report"
  • "but it was not confirmed because it was not confirmed to have touched down" wordy, consider reword
    •   Done
  • Comma after "Comanche County, Kansas" (MOS:GEOCOMMA)
  • "12 miles (19 km)" this {{convert}} needs |adj=on set. The sentence needs help, too: The tornado was spotted right before a hail and high wind storm, which originated about 6 miles (9.7 km) north of Ashland, moved southward, causing a 12 miles (19 km) wide swath of damage as winds flattened nearly ripe wheat, and hail caused extensive damage to crops and light damage to property.
  • Consider The tornado was spotted right before a hail and high wind storm which had originated about 6 miles (9.7 km) north of Ashland moved southward and caused a 12-mile (19 km) wide swath of damage. High winds flattened nearly ripe wheat, while hail caused extensive damage to crops and light damage to property.
  • over 3 inches (7.6 cm) that damaged Coldwater, Over three inches of what?
  • This violent F4 tornado, which may have been a tornado family, was first observed touching down McLeod County, and immediately striking the south side of Hutchinson at around 5:30 pm CT. Add "in" after "down" and remove the comma after "County" (see User:Sammi Brie/Commas in sentences)
  • Comma after "obliterated"; see the page linked above
  • The last three commas in the sentence starting "Additionally, plate..." need to be semicolons.
  • First two paragraphs in the only tornado breakout subsection need citations.
  • Comma after "one person was killed"

Non-tornadic impacts edit

  • This section would sorely benefit from more paragraph breaks and better organization.
  • Comma after (Morton Mills, Iowa" (GEOCOMMA)
  • "Overexertion" one word
  • Comma after "electric line"
  • Comma after "foot deep"
  • Decapitalize southern; Comma after "Barber County, Kansas"; Comma after "Hardtner" to complete an appositive.
  • Remove the last "and" and add a comma
  • Would getting newspaper sources help?
    @ChessEric, I can assist if you tell me what you feel needs newspaper clippings. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Thank you very much! ChessEric (talk · contribs) 20:08, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
    @ChessEric I clipped a few summaries of storm damage from the next day. Do these help?[1][2][3] Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
    @Sammi Brie: It appears so. Thank you. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 18:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Let me know when you've incorporated that, make sure to run a date script and archive references, and ping me. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
    @Sammi Brie: This is why newspapers (and Grazulis) are SO helpful. The NCEI track of the F4 tornado is total BS. The ENTIRE section regarding the F4 tornado needs a rewrite. The GA may need to be held off entirely because of this. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 18:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
    Whoa, I missed this ping! Looks like we're going to have to rethink this. I will fail this GA to allow fixing of this particular issue and am more than happy to contribute newspaper sourcing if more is needed. @ChessEric, you should consider applying for Newspapers.com access through WP:TWL. I wouldn't be here today without it. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Other items edit

References edit

  1. ^ "Storms Hit Minnesota, Mid-Iowa". Globe-Gazette. Mason City, Iowa. Associated Press. June 20, 1951. p. 1. Retrieved August 24, 2022 – via Newspapers.com.
  2. ^ "Jacket Blown Onto Tree, Pockets Emptied". The Minneapolis Star. Minneapolis, Minnesota. June 20, 1951. p. 1. Retrieved August 24, 2022 – via Newspapers.com.
  3. ^ Fitzmaurice, Larry (June 20, 1951). "Tornado Damage Appraised". The Minneapolis Star. Minneapolis, Minnesota. p. 1, 2. Retrieved August 24, 2022 – via Newspapers.com.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 1 year ago18 comments2 people in discussion
Passed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tornado outbreak of June 19, 1951/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 04:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

This review focuses almost solely on the material that was added as a result of newspaper sources requiring a rewrite of the F4 tornado. See Talk:Tornado outbreak of June 19, 1951/GA1 for the remainder of my comments, which were implemented. This is a new 7-day hold to ChessEric. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

  • Consider a cite invoke for the police chief's car after the third sentence.
  • Additionally, plate glass windows were blown in; chimneys were toppled; windows were broken; billboards and signs were blown down, and cars were damaged or destroyed, power and communication lines were blown down, hundreds of trees were uprooted, and growing crops were damaged. This sentence is a bit long and overly detailed. Which three of these things are most salient to describe the extent of tornado damage, and can the others be summarized (e.g. "with damage to chimneys, hundreds of trees, and crops")?
    •   Done Tornado damage description are normally very detailed, but I did decide to consolidate the sentence by combining "like damages" together. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Two homes sustained low-end F3 damage and debris from the town was strewn along MN 7. You need a comma after "damage"
    •   Done See comment below (I'm going up the list while doing GAN edits BTW). ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • The tornado then moved northeastward heavily damaging several farms north of Silver Lake before possibly lifting before reaching Wright County. From "heavily to Lake" should be an appositive set off in commas. Remove the first "before".
    •   Done I think I'm really starting to hate commas. I NEVER KNOW WHERE THEY GO!!!! XD ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Heavy rain and hail continued with the storm before the tornado touched down again in Hennepin County, Minnesota at around 6:30 pm CT. No need to say "Minnesota" here. If you did, you'd need an MOS:GEOCOMMA.
  • near Hamel about 6 mi (9.7 km) west of Robbinsdale Comma after "Hamel"
  • She would later die at the hospital. Her nephew and foster daughter were also injured Join these sentences with a semicolon
  • The tornado then weakened, doing less intense damage, before restrengthening to a slightly weaker, but still intense F3 tornado as it struck Brooklyn Center at around 7 pm CT. Complete the appositive by adding a comma after "intense"
    •   Done Actually, I decided to rewrite the sentence altogether since my wording seemed to be very redundant. Is there anything else I need to do there? ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • "Seven homes were also destroyed and clocks were stopped at 7:01 pm as the power went out. A boy was injured in the town as well. The tornado then crossed over into Anoka County northwest of Spring Lake Park, where more damage and destruction occurred and clocks were stopped at 7:03 pm CT." Do we need to know when the clocks stopped?
    • I thought it would be interesting to note. Do you think its too much? ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • "After either briefly weakening or possibly lifting" comma after this long prepositional phrase
    •   Done Thanks for understanding the meaning of this phrase as well. In many instances of older tornado records, many tornadoes that have been deemed as long-tracked are actually tornado families. However, the lack of adequate technology to make these conclusions made it impossible to determine whether or not it was one long-tracked tornado or a series of tornadoes. The NCEI path is a product of this. The map is actually not as off as I thought, but is nonetheless substantially incorrect because it did not separate the two events from each other. Although they indicated the actual damage path, the newspapers that covered the event could not definitely diversify them either albeit, as you see below, the seemed to deem any ground circulation event as a tornado, which was not the case. However, the CDNS report surprisingly did not do diversify the two events as well; in fact, the damage reported for the event only included the town of Hutchinson. This is probably why the NCEI just drew a straight line from Hutchinson through Rockford to Anoka. It will be interesting to see just how many more times this is going to occur and is also the reason why I'm going back through all these tornado pages for older years and adding damage reports to them. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
    @ChessEric: I strongly urge you to apply for Newspapers.com via WP:TWL. If the references I provided here were this significant, imagine the impact they could have on other articles in the topic. Will pass. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:45, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Other areas edit

  • The first paragraph of "Non-tornadic impacts" still begs for a split, likely after "Many roofs had holes in them, which allowed heavy rain to go through them and cause more damage" (which is missing a period at the end and should get a paragraph-ending inline citation if this is done).
    •   Done I was having trouble with figuring out where to put another split. Thanks for your insight. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 22:49, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • "was also reported Garwin" missing an "at"
  • I contributed two more storm reports from Iowa newspapers to this section.
    •   Done Thank you for this. I was able to sort them out, although it is somewhat annoying that the newspaper deemed any sort of ground circulation to be a tornado when its just strong straight-line winds. The public TRULY had NO CLUE what they were looking at. XD ChessEric (talk · contribs) 22:49, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • NOTE: We have been moving away from centering ratings in the tables so I've   Done that as well. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 22:51, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tornado_outbreak_of_June_19,_1951&oldid=1204109886"