Talk:2018 United States–Canada tornado outbreak

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blpo=no|1= {{Canadian English}} {{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| {{WikiProject Weather|importance=low|thunderstorms-and-tornadoes-task-force=yes}} {{WikiProject Canada|on=yes|qc=yes|importance=Low|ottawa=yes|ottawa-importance=mid}} {{WikiProject Disaster management|importance=low}} }}

Nepean tornado time
The Nepean tornado (often referred to as the Arlington Woods tornado, even though it continued much further through Ottawa than just that hardest hit neighbourhood) actually occurred around 6 PM EDT, as it says in citation #2 and in the official Environment Canada report and elsewhere. It was the Dunrobin-Gatineau EF-3 which ended around 5:20 PM, the Nepean tornado occurred over an hour later and had a damage path of almost 20 km. 6:30 PM would probably be a reasonable approximation of when it ended, but there's no official timing on that.

I'll change it to 6:30 PM for now, but perhaps just removing the uncertain end time would be appropriate. I just know for sure that the tornado activity did not end at 5:20 PM as this article currently says. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.187.65 (talk) 01:09, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Will likely be moving this page to include the United States tornadoes
Upon further research, it appears that this was a two-day outbreak that began in the United States on September 20 before tornado activity moved eastward into Canada on September 21. All of these tornadoes were linked to the same weather system. A name change and section for the U.S. tornadoes seems appropriate TornadoInformation12 (talk) 23:33, 8 December 2018 (UTC)TornadoInformation12
 * I oppose this, as most of the damage happened in the Ottawa-Gatineau area. -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not how it works. When an outbreak occurs, the entire sequence of events is documented, regardless of the significance of tornadoes that occurred the previous day, or the geographic region affected. You don't get to "cherry pick" portions of an outbreak for publication that one may deem more significant that the other. If all tornadoes were spawned by one system, all tornadoes must be listed. That is how it has always been done with these articles. You really should look at other tornado outbreak articles from recent years. Also, not to mention, two of the Minnesota tornadoes from September 20 were strong and destructive, so the first half of the outbreak was fairly significant in it own right.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 06:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)TornadoInformation12
 * Well, that's a ridiculous policy. It makes no sense to include information about tornadoes that happened as far away as Minnesota, even if it was part of "one system". Write a separate article on them if they were notable. This was a very significant weather event for this region; people are going to expect the article title to reflect that. -- Earl Andrew - talk 14:21, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, at no point has there ever been two separate wiki articles for a single tornado outbreak based entirely on geography. Doing so would be asinine and unprecedented, so it isn't going to happen that way, sorry. Distance between events is not something that ever has, or ever will be factored in. All tornadoes from one weather system are to be listed. Period. There are plenty articles on Wikipedia that cover outbreaks that lasted multiple days across larger distances than this one. As an example, on the last day of this particular outbreak (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tornadoes_in_the_tornado_outbreak_of_May_18%E2%80%9321,_2013#May_21_event), this system spit out three tornadoes in Canada before dissipating, even though 95% of the tornadoes during the event occurred in the US. We still had to include them as they were part of the SAME outbreak! Are you getting this yet? If not, it doesn't matter, because I'll be making the move later today. Sorry if this outbreak seemed special and unique to Canada, and that you wanted to keep it that way, but you can't just omit information.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 18:46, 9 December 2018 (UTC)TornadoInformation12
 * It's absolutely not "asinine". We split articles up all the time on Wikipedia for many different reasons. I see no reason why we can't do the same here. There's nothing special about tornado outbreaks that make it any different from other topics on Wikipedia. Again, this tornado outbreak was of specific significance to the Ottawa-Gatineau region. There definitely needs to be an article specifically referencing the impact on the Ottawa-Gatineau region. If you want to create an article discussing the entirety of the outbreaks, I won't stop you, but leave this article put. And it WILL happen, because I will just re-create it, unless the community consensus opposes it. -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:05, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It was NOT specific to the Ottawa-Gatineau region! That is what you aren't getting. This outbreak began in Minnesota! You can't just leave that out because you want a Canada-centric article. You have clearly NO experience with tornado outbreak articles, and that is all I do personally. There has NEVER been a split of information relating to a tornado outbreak article based on geography in the history of them on Wikipedia, and I've been doing this for a long time. Like I said, unprecedented. It doesn't have do with there being anything "special" about tornado outbreak articles on wikipedia that prevents them from being split. It has to do with the entire sequence of events being documented, regardless of geography. Just documenting the Canadian portion of the events is an incomplete version of what actually happened.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 19:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)TornadoInformation12


 * Hi. I am not taking sides here but I would like to mention that in the article 1999 Oklahoma tornado outbreak, there is mention of tornadoes affecting other states without renaming the article to include all those states. Furthermore, the 2011 Joplin tornado has its owns article even it was part of the Tornado outbreak sequence of May 21–26, 2011, because of the significance of that tornado. So, while outbreaks can be contained into a single articles, it does not means that the title is related to the larger events, AND on the other side, parts of an outbreak can have their own article.


 * Finally, I see that you did not wait to change the title. In my opinion, this new title is totally inapproriate since there was many tornado Outbreaks that affected the Midwest AND southwest Ontario in 2018. You have to be more precise than that: give the area affected and the dates or month.
 * Pierre cb (talk) 03:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * you cannot move articles until there is a consensus. I am reverting your edits. -- Earl Andrew - talk 15:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's the deal. You can make a Canada-only page on this event, but it needs to be a separate article linked to this one. The entire event NEEDS to be documented on this page. End of story. And I'm not changing the title. This has been the only event this year that could be considered an "outbreak" in Canada. There have been isolated tornadoes on other days, but those weren't true outbreaks. Other US-Canada outbreaks have been titled similarly (see below). Split it if you want, but it won't last. This article here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_United_States%E2%80%93Canada_tornado_outbreak) once had a separate but linked page for the Canadian tornadoes, but it was later merged as it was inefficient and made no sense. That's what will eventually happen if you make a Canada-centric article linked to this one. Spare yourself the time and effort.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 17:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)TornadoInofrmation12


 * You should note that there was a consensus to merge those articles. You have still failed to reach a consensus on moving this article. No one else supports your page move. -- Earl Andrew - talk 18:36, 10 December 2018 (UTC)


 * What "consensus" can be reached if only you and I are discussing this? Nobody else is participating or taking a specific stance besides us. All that leaves us with is prior articles/outbreaks to use as a reference for how to deal with this one. The 1985 United States-Canada tornado outbreak article is the closest match, and any logical person would follow that format. Now as Pierre cb noted, this doesn't stop you from embedding a second article for the Canada tornadoes (as impractical as that would be) within this one. However, simply removing the United States tornadoes from this event is not an option.

TornadoInformation12 (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2018 (UTC)TornadoInformation12


 * Oppose: Significant and notable event in Canada and article should be split into two instead of moved and renamed. Also, unreasonable to expect a consesus between proposing the move on 23:33, 8 December 2018 and moving the article on 22:45, December 9, 2018.

// sikander { talk } 12:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)