Talk:Great Blizzard of 1899

29 degree high
The report of a 29 degree high in Miami may be incorrect, Most other sources cite it as the low temperature in miami, not the high (But still the coldest ever reached there) 129.21.140.12 06:34, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The high of 29 for Miami is definitely incorrect. According to the archived NOAA daily weather maps from this event, the high temperatures at Jupiter, FL (to the north of Miami along Florida's east coast) on the 14th and 15th were 64 and 58, respectively, along with low temperatures of 22 and 30, respectively. Refer to http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/dwm/1899/18990214.djvu and http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/dwm/1899/18990215.djvu This would be consistent with a LOW temperature of 29 at Miami, which would experience more modified temperatures compared to Jupiter.

Causes
Are there any theories as to cause of the unusual cold temp/weather? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.70.254 (talk) 09:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I found these links which jelp
 * A history of Blizzards
 * The Great Arctic Outbreak and East Coast Blizzard of February 1899
 * UGA doc
 * This map on from artcile is great.but it refers to a missing NOAA artcile  great. but i can't find the source for the map :-(.
 * Also to give non US references
 * The Italian Arctic expedition 1899–1900: What happened to the first support party?
 * Record Cold of February 1899 (weather.gov)
 * The Great Arctic Outbreak of February 1899 (weather.gov)
 * And some nice pics
 * Cleaning the streets in a New York blizzard digital file from original
 * there are lots of pics
 * https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=blizzard+%221899%22&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image
 * on the streets of NY
 * carts
 * 1899 Storm Wakelamp d&#91;@-@&#93;b (talk) 11:52, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

&amp;minus;
Is it really necessary to use &amp;minus; instead of a simple dash(-) to denote negative temperatures? For me it shows up as a box. I'd imagine it shows up for a lot of other people as a box as well. It seems to me that a simple dash(-) would show up as a simple dash to just about everyone. Jbarta (talk) 07:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

{&minus} {&-}

Removed
"The only other blizzard to strike the Southeast was the 1993 Superstorm." That is false. There was a huge snowstorm in February, 1973 that dumped 1-2 feet of snow on parts of central Georgia and central South Carolina. If you don't believe me, google it.
 * While there may have been other blizzards, just realize that blizzard does NOT equal huge snowstorm (despite what the media think). A blizzard is a combination of heavy falling and/or blowing snow and high winds gusting to 35 mph or greater which lower visibility to one quarter mile or less for 3 hours or more.  Google THAT. Famartin (talk) 03:56, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * What about 1783/1784?
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laki#Consequences_in_North_America
 * http://acatte.perso.neuf.fr/Iceland_Laki_in_english.htm
 * "In eastern North America, the winter of 1783-1784 was the longest and one of the coldest in American history. It was the longest period of below zero temperature in New England, the largest accumulation of snow in New Jersey, and the longest freezing over of the Chesapeake Bay. There was ice skating in Charleston Harbor, a huge snowstorm hit the south, the Mississippi River at New Orleans froze over, and there were even ice floes in the Gulf of Mexico (Wood 1992). "--Keelec (talk) 20:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Cold Freeze of 1985
The 1899 record-setting cold freeze for much of the Eastern U.S. was matched or exceeded 86 years later. The January 1985 cold freeze saw record lows from -73F (Ontario), -69F (Utah), -61F (Colorado), -34F (North Carolina), etc. Note that in ATLANTA weather history, the two coldest years were 1899 (-9F) and 1985 (-8F) whereas the third-coldest was just -3F. My question is: is there a comparable article on the 1985 event? Ryoung 122 19:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Never mind, I found it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Arctic_outbreak

Some formatting needs to be done, however. Ryoung 122 19:40, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Article is 145KB
This article is... long, and I simply do not see the point in having lows for every single state that had been around at the time (especially when it takes up the bulk of the article.) Deleting all of it is impractical, simply due to the amount in the list, so I'd like to spark a conversation about if any of the list is salvageable, and potentially what to add to it in replacement of the list. As, of course, removing the statistics is going to cut the article down to 10-15% of its former size. Lightly Snealed (talk) 21:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would be that impractical. It appears the vast majority of the list, if not all of it, comes from a single website which allows one to view climate records through a tool, and it appears that the list is just filled with every single possible record in the affected area from that date. Perhaps the best option, then, would be to remove the entire list and only keep the most important records, with perhaps a reference to that website where an interested reader could go and find climate records for various other cities and places. Church of vi (talk) 14:40, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I've tried removing it for now, but it appears it was blocked as "new user blanking article". I mean, removing 90% can be pretty easily interpreted as that, so I get why they have that filter... Oh well.
 * I think the best option would be to either keep it out entirely or copy out the bits that were removed (which is easy enough to do from the edit log, once or if it happens) and move it to its own dedicated list page. Church of vi (talk) 21:42, 12 July 2022 (UTC)