Talk:2006 Colorado Holiday Blizzards

Rename?
I think the article should be renamed to reflect the area better and avoid the whole religious debate. Perhaps Colorado Blizzard of December 2006? Hurricanehink ( talk ) 01:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. At this length anyway, it could easily be shifted to the proper sections of Winter storms of 2006-07 unless it can be expanded. Also make Blizzard plural in your renaming to cover both last week and the upcoming one. CrazyC83 03:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Definitely rename it. bob rulz 04:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * If there are concrete sources which call it the Hanukkah Blizzard, then I'm all for the name, given that the only way I've heard it referred to is as "that Blizzard near Denver". -Runningonbrains 15:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * There's clearly mention of a news anchor referring to it by the name. I see no reason why it should be renamed. 63.227.40.33 12:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Where is there mention of the news anchor? Additionally, does what one news anchor say warrant being official? Officially, the Denver National Weather Service refers this storm as the December 20-21 Winter Storm. That could work with a location and year added. December 20-21, 2006 Denver Winter Storm? It's a little long, but the date is needed to differentiate from the one a week later. Here's one NWS link which says this storm was #7 on the top 10 Denver snowstorms, and this NWS link shows some totals and a snow total map. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 19:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * well, the news anchor mention is at the end of the first paragraph. I think the Hanukkah Blizzard name is more fitting, maybe the alternate names could be added as a subsection?


 * Why is the name more fitting? It gives no mention to location, and it's bordering on POV (not everyone celebrates Hanukkah). The name is not official at all if just one news anchor named it. I'm being bold and moving it to December 20-21, 2006 Colorado Blizzard, though feel free to change it further if that doesn't work. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 21:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Or, call it the Holiday Blizzard of 2006. That's what I heard being used. Never heard it called Christmas OR Hanukkah blizzard, and I watched the news religiously. Holiday Blizzard is PC and is what the media was calling it. Trodaikid1983 17:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, that doesn't differentiate between the two blizzards. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

A photo for this article
The photo can be found here. Its caption reads:
 * Wyoming Air National Guard loadmasters aboard a C-130 Hercules aircraft watch as a one-ton hay bale lands near a herd of cows during an emergency feeding mission in southeast Colorado Jan. 3, 2007. The hay was dropped near La Junta, Colorado, to help feed livestock that have been stranded from a snowstorm that has impacted the area.

66.167.253.34 01:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Rename again or split?
Since this article apparently now covers both of the blizzards, should the article be renamed again? If so, what would it be renamed to? Or should we just split it into two seperate articles to cover the different storms? bob rulz 07:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I think 2006 Colorado Holiday Blizzards would be a good title.. but thats just me. EnsRedShirt 08:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, since this covers four holidays (Haunnakah, Solstice, Christmas and New Years, it doesn't belong to any one of them. 2006 Colorado Holiday Blizzards works for me. 71.218.164.9 00:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree the title "2006 Colorado Holiday Blizzards" is best. Drop the December dates from the title, they're hard to remember and will not flow well in linking text.  The salient feature of these blizzards is that they struck Denver at the peak of Christmas travel (and "holiday" is fine) and stranded people for days at the airport. 2006 Denver Holiday Blizzards would be OK too, and is perhaps better linked to the stranding aspect, but "Colorado" works too.  Regarding splitting or keeping the two blizzards in one article, I'm for one article -- the  2nd storm would hardly be notably were it not paired with the first.   technopilgrim 00:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * "2006 Coloroda Holiday Blizzards" is the most suitable name, as per all above, and that it avoids amgibuation. Patar knight 22:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd like to propose that we rename the article the Holiday Blizzards of 2006 and add information about the storms' impact on Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. This wasn't just a storm for Colorado, although I think Colorado caught the brunt of the force. Thoughts? Bdevoe (talk) 22:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge
My vote is to merge Denver Christmas Blizzard of 2006 into this article. Gopher backer 02:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Merged. (actually, I copiued it in as a subsection and now it needs editing). RJFJR 15:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Colorado Holiday Blizzards (2006–07). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110607234719/http://www.defense.gov/news/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=2601 to http://www.defense.gov/news/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=2601

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)