Talk:May 2022 Canadian derecho

Current event
This article seems to be WP:RECENTISM - will follow for a few days to see if anything further comes about regarding this topic. If not, this article should either be moved to draftspace or deleted on grounds of WP:NOTNEWS / WP:BREAKING. ~XyNq tc 20:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * For weather articles, WP:RECENTISM is sort of ignored. In reality, this was started at the perfect time, since it is after the event ended, meaning WP:BREAKING is not at play here. Elijahandskip (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I see, thank you!  ~XyNq tc 20:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a unique event, in that I cannot think of a single other Canadian derecho which did not also strike the U.S. (usually originating there). The far more usual pattern is a U.S.-based severe weather system, where Canada catches either the northernmost tip of the weather or where it reaches Canada after leaving a U.S. trail. This one formed in Canada, travelled entirely in Canada, and dissipated in Canada. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 22:57, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is pretty unique, some parts of Ottawa have never lost power for this long in the city's history. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Expanding the article
I can flesh it out np (might even have it mostly completed by tomorrow), but fully coding reference urls is not my thing. Could some kind soul fix them? - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 23:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you to all who fleshed this out so thoroughly in the past few days! as well as to the person who fixed my links. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Lake Memphremagog gust is unrelated
Please note that while the 89 mph gust at Lake Memphremagog was the strongest of the day, it was actually produced by a separate line of storms and not the derecho. Video briefings by The Weather Network do not mention it as related to the event. Blizk2 (talk) 17:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for correcting me on that. I knew the area was prone to extremely severe storms, but apart from the one linked article, I had not personally looked into that. I notice it has stuck around in the lede etc, so I will check that in about five hours before I delete it. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 17:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The Lake Memphremagog gust is considered to be part of the derecho. A second storm cell also hit it later. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 06:21, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * According to a local meteorologist the observation is in fact bogus. There are no corresponding damage reports. https://twitter.com/Pat_wx/status/1528361330914299905 Blizk2 (talk) 10:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This Weather Network reporter thinks otherwise: see https://twitter.com/HowesNathan/status/1528403039081664512 . Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 21:15, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's hard to say if the gust was plausible. It's still debatable if the 144 km/h wind gust was true. However, it wasn't part of the derecho. The derecho has hit the north shore of the St. Lawrence River. That cluster of thunderstorms that impacted the Eastern Townships formed on the south shore earlier in the afternoon as a different cluster of storms because of instability and wind shear in the area. Olivierveer (talk) 10:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Northern Tornadoes Project has released an extensive survey report of the derecho, including maps that show all related wind observations of below 90 km/h (gold) and between 90-130 km/h (blue). The observation at Magog is also mapped in grey, which presumably means it was not verified. https://uwo.ca/ntp/blog/2022/may_21_derecho_update_2_of_2_efscale_contour_map.html Blizk2 (talk) 23:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 24 May 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. There seems to be a pretty clear consensus through this discussion that the system in question was specific to Canada. (non-admin closure) Turnagra (talk) 19:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

May 2022 Canadian derecho → May 2022 North American storm complex – This same storm brought a strong winter storm to Colorado, causing over 100,000 people to lose power, and a very big temperature drop, and a tornado in Michigan that killed two. They all need mentioning and to be accounted for in the title. 74.101.118.197 (talk) 20:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Citation needed! The article doesn't even mention anything like that. And somehow I think if the situation were in reverse (i.e., 45% of the US was affected by something while only disparate weather events affected Canada), there would be no way "North America" would be in the article title. (I can remember there was a push for the more US-centric title 2021 Pacific Northwest heat wave over 2021 Western North America heat wave last year). I was thinking that if the article were to be renamed to anything it would be May 2022 Ontario–Quebec derecho, as it only affected those two provinces.-- Earl Andrew - talk 20:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This derecho event warrants a standalone article as it's comparable to other high-impact events with the same classification, so I'm against moving the article to that name. Blizk2 (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm searching "United States" derecho for evidence that it came from the "storm complex" mentioned below, and it's not evident. Another key difference is that the snow storm was forewarned, whereas there was nothing on that morning's weather in Ontario. --  Zanimum (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Tenebris, above, claims that this was exclusively in Canada. --  Zanimum (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Some newspaper and TV web articles in Canada said the derecho was only formed around London, Ontario. It may be part of the same weather system as the tornado in Michigan but all weather is part of larger systems.  This is a very, very unique event within Ontario and adjacent areas of Quebec (the first storm of this nature since the 1990s) and merits being given a Canadian-specific title.  Or, at least call in a Great Lakes storm, so people know it focused on the Great Lakes and wasn't North American-wide.  Even the use of the word derencho will make it hard for people to find this article.  Maybe "windstorm" is better.Eastern Cougar (talk) 21:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Disagree. Environment Canada states this started near Sarnia, Ontario and didn't say or mention this was a pre-existing storm that started in the US. They'd have no reason not to mention it started in the U.S, if it did. Also, almost entirely all damage was done in Canada. Keep the name or change it to what Earl Andrew suggested (May 2022 Ontario–Quebec derecho). Josh Robillard (talk) 07:47, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Strongly disagree. This was an extraordinary event for Canada, and the phenomenon was very specifically a derecho. Winds exceeded 120km/h so hurricane force. Multiple fatalities. Damage documented to be worse than the 1988 ice storm, so in Ottawa (a G7 capital) and other large areas of Ontario the worst natural disaster in over a century. Power still out 4 days later, and for many likely out for many more days.Timothy C. Lethbridge (talk) 12:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Strongly against : this radar/satellite loop (https://twitter.com/ECCCMeteoQC/status/1528142539848654849) shows that the derecho is entirely independant. Pierre cb (talk) 12:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Except the derecho was spawned by a larger weather system 216.24.109.110 (talk) 17:05, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Based on NOAA mesoanalysis archive it wasn't directly related to the winter weather in Colorado (same large scale synoptic setting, different storm). The derecho producing storm is related to the same low pressure system that helped produced the Gaylord, Michigan tornado. However, the derecho itself is so notable that the page should not be demoted to cover other subjects. Blizk2 (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Strongly Disagree, per everyone else pointing this was a Canadian phenomenon. But even assuming there was some spillover to the US, it isn't a) mentioned in any of the articles cited by the article as sources, and b) only the Canadian portion of this hypothetical storm complex was notable enough to warrant a article CASalt (talk) 19:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I slightly disagree. A tornado killing 2 is sometimes notable enough to merit an article. 74.101.118.197 (talk) 20:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, while the derecho formed in Ontario, the storm system originated out in Colorado. 74.101.118.197 (talk) 20:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Strongly disagree. A derecho is a unique weather system that forms over a precise area (Here, it formed in Sarnia, ON) and the derecho almost exclusively impacted canadian territory. The most significant impacts of the derecho were on canadian territory. This was not a single storm complex. This was precisely a derecho and it was very different to the events in Colorado. The title should remain as "May 2022 Canadian derecho" as it was a historic event for Canada and it represents well what happened. Olivierveer (talk) 10:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

If you take it far enough, all storms are part of the same storm complex. The derecho-specific features, however, were exclusively in Canada. (Minimum windspeed across separated sites along the bow echo, minimum width of bow echo, minimum path length.) The minimum wind speed required for the derecho labelling did not exist until the squall line fully coalesced at London, Ontario, although some aspects of it were visible as far east as Sarnia. (The exact details here are still under investigation: see https://weather.gc.ca/warnings/weathersummaries_e.html#ON .) Tornadoes associated with derechos are Quasi-Linear Convective System (QLCS) tornadoes, which are always embedded in the leading edge of the derecho. (Most tornadoes occur to the aft of thunderstorms.) The Gaylord tornado was separate and distinct from the bow echo of the derecho. The timeline difference alone should make that clear: the derecho squall front was moving very quickly, it hit London around 11-11:30, and Toronto about 1-1/2 hours later. (London sprawls. in fact, even within west and east London, there was a distinct increase in wind speed.) In contrast, the Gaylord tornado happened on Friday afternoon. Incidentally, while there was an NOAA-declared marginal/slight chance for severe weather in Southwestern Ontario, it was looking like any tornadoes would not form until the complex reached eastern Ontario and Quebec. There was a monitored/warned storm in Sarnia and Windsor on Saturday morning, which looked like typical severe weather at the time, but the coalescing into actual derecho structure came as a surprise. All parts of Ontario and Quebec received at least 20 minutes warning (even London had more than an hour), and after London, the words "life threatening" were added to the warrning. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 17:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I went into the NOAA archives, and the single warned storm in Michigan on Saturday happened after the derecho (2:17 pm). So: yes, it was related within the larger instability, but it was not meteorologically part of the derecho. No point putting it into the article, since it is not part of the derecho. See: https://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/220521_rpts.html - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 18:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Report times are in UTC, so you need to reduce 4 hours to get the time in EDT. Wind reports from Macomb and St. Clair counties align pretty much perfectly with the passage of the line. Blizk2 (talk) 18:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I should have caught that. You are exactly right. So it would be fair to say that the development began just west of Lake Huron, but the derecho itself did not form (by strict definition) until east of Lake Huron. I will add that to the article. That being said, my vote is still against broadening the title for two reasons: (1) distinct derecho features did not form until in Canada, and (2) significant derechos are usually given their own page, even when related to larger storm structures. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 03:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

It has been two days since anyone commented on this. Multiple posters have stated that it should be its own independent article, based on: impact on Canada specifically; how sources are referencing it; NOAA analysis of same large scale synoptic setting, different storm; when the derecho-specific features manifested; etc. The OP's and one subsequent pro-change comment have been specifically addressed. Since I am an involved editor, I will not myself close this discussion, but I will ask if someone else can do so and remove the tag from the main page. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 08:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Support: The system that produced this derecho also produced a deadly EF3 tornado in Michigan. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 05:10, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Pinging for further comments. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 00:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not directed at you in particular, but I absolutely hate it when people start bolding their positions when no one else has been doing it before in the discussion. It obscures the actual tally of support vs oppose. But anyway, let the record show that at the time this comment was made the tally for the move was 9 opposed and 1 in favour, with this comment the tally for "in favour" had just jumped to two. CASalt (talk) 01:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * My apologies. Every other page I've voted on used bolded positions, so I was just following what I know. I've been on Wikipedia for just over two years now, but do not claim to know everything, so I just learned something new today. So again I apologize and thank you for the info. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 18:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Also as a substantive reply to your comment, my response would be that even assuming this was part of the same weather system, the Canadian derecho is still notable enough to warrant an article of it's own. Instead of demoting this article, another proposal could be to make a seperate article for the Michigan tornado, if it so warrants. CASalt (talk) 01:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose. The derecho far exceeded the impact from the Gaylord tornado, which was one of the few from the event. CrazyC83 (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC) Oppose – per others here. United States Man (talk) 22:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Looks like we have a consensus that the page should not be moved. Since this is pretty clear, we don't need an administrator to close the discussion and can go through a less formal procedure that won't take weeks to finalize per the guidelines. I don't want to do it myself as I'm quite inexperienced at it. Blizk2 (talk) 11:32, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 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.

Radar image
Looking for radar images, either as a video or as a series of stills, that we can use under CC. So far, the best option I have found is Accuweather, and therefore not wiki-usable. Still, it will give the idea of what is needed. https://media.zenfs.com/en/accuweather_297/13d0f5bd8d5541ec9487a81fb826be77 - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 06:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

The current gif is not working for me as an animated image, and it does not really illustrate storm structure well. Essentially, it duplicates the top picture. Thus, for now, I am deleting it. Hopefully we can get something better, maybe something like the main image in June 2012 North American derecho. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 21:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Lack of References
There are numerous statements/sentences in this article that are not referenced and are not summari3s of more detailed sections that are referenced. Why is this being allowed especially since this is a very recent?? Every statement is supposed to be referenced.142.181.173.97 (talk) 01:06, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * One of the two parts you deleted on the basis of referencing is simply the text version of the graphic. I restored it, but added some extra referencing. The other piece of text you deleted I left deleted, since it could be a matter of opinion. Please note that references don't have to be given every sentence, so long as the reference covers the text. (I am aware that there is a minor WP feud over this issue.) - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 08:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * There might be users involved who don't edit Wikipedia articles so much, which speaks it's own volume about the impact of this event. This also manifests itself in frequent social media references, mainly Twitter, which are generally not considered reliable for Wikipedia. I previously referred to them just to discuss about it here.
 * As for the Background section as a whole, the content may be largely redundant for this article because it's already available elsewhere on Wikipedia and linked. This includes the climatology infographics. Some of it is fine because meteorologists are talking about past derecho events in relation to the topic. Blizk2 (talk) 09:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I did use Twitter references by Environment Canada to source the times of warnings. - Tenebris — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.90.95 (talk) 15:48, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Metric units
The derecho infobox template shows the units in Imperial first, before showing the metric units in parenthesis. Is there any way to reverse this? CASalt (talk) 02:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Image
I think this image would be useful to the text to explain the connection of this progressive derecho with the heatwave further south: https://www.spc.noaa.gov/misc/AbtDerechos/images/Jet_Stream_figs/serialvsprogressive.png. (U.S. government, so WP-acceptable.) Someone please upload it if you agree. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 08:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Gaylord Tornado
I feel like the Gaylord EF3 shouldn't be included in this article. The tornado was NOT apart of the derecho that impacted Canada. I was going to remove it but decided to ask here. Do you guys think it should be included in this article? JimmyTheMarble (talk) 19:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I reverted the multiple edits that added the Gaylord tornado, as we already have a pretty good consensus about this in the requested move discussion. Furthermore, unofficial analysis by meteorologist Dave Sills (on Twitter) makes it evident that the derecho-producing convective system formed over Missouri in the early hours of May 21, well after the supercell that produced the tornado had dissipated. Blizk2 (talk) 11:45, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Citation 23
Citation 23, needs an archival link to the data that it is suppose to be citing as it is on a routinely updating page. It is cited in multiple places. (Perm link during this notice: ). Elijahandskip (talk) 09:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

No longer start class?
Thank you everyone who dealt with my bare urls. There may still be a few loose urls, but once those are resolved, I think this article can be sent for evaluation for an upgrade. We must be at least B-class by now! Also please note, the background IS sourced. Setting words to an image in the article counts. (The image is legit CC due to U.S. government source.) - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 08:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Seeking pictures from outside the Ottawa region
Anyone have pictures of storm damage from London (tornadoes), K-W, Brampton, Peterborough, Uxbridge, or anywhere in Quebec? Can we send a call out requesting such pictures? Any radar images of the tornadoes? It would be useful to have a more representative gallery, and I would like to put a non-Ottawa picture into the article as the second illustrative photo. Ironically, although I was dealing with damage and storm-related issues, I don't have any myself. (On-site advance poll election workers, you did an amazing job!) - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 08:47, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Moved the Uxbridge pic into the main article. Still ideally seeking a London (tornado aftermath) pic, as well as a radar image composite. - Tenebris 66.11.165.101 (talk) 15:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)