Talk:Hurricane Cindy tornado outbreak

Weather: Tropical / Atlantic / Non-tropical / Thunderstorms / Tornadoes Mid‑importance

	Weather portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This redirect is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This redirect is supported by the Atlantic hurricane work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This redirect is supported by the Non-tropical storms task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Tornadoes portal This redirect is supported by WikiProject Severe weather (assessed as Mid-importance).

Todo

Expand the lead, add in-line references, include a brief summary of the hurricane, but other than that, a decent start. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 20:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This looks primarily like a list. Shouldn't the article be renamed? Thegreatdr (talk) 20:46, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It does indeed appear to be a list, but I've seen lists named without the "List of...", so given how long the title of this article is already, I think it should be fine. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 23:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still working on it. Just wanted to get the bulk of the work saved. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've updated the lead, added a summary of the event, and added a section on the Atlanta Motor Speedway tornado. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2005 Hurricane Cindy tornado outbreak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

This discussion resulted in a consensus to merge the two articles. In assessing the quality of the arguments, I gave greater weight to comments that addressed the points listed at WP:MERGEREASON. Now that consensus has been determined, any editor, including the editor who originally proposed the merger can perform the merge. I leave it to those of you that are more well-versed in this topic area. Firefangledfeathers (talk

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.

This outbreak wasn’t very notable and Cindy’s article is quite short, it could be easily merged. If kept, I suggest it just be the Atlanta motor speedway tornado, similar to the 2013 Hattiesburg tornado 108.170.65.170 (talk) 14:53, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose. A merge is not needed. It’s fine as it is. The system produced numerous tornadoes and a merge is unnecessary. IBlazeCat (talk) 23:55, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but just because a system produces many tornadoes doesn’t mean it should be kept. And I think a merge is necessary because it would beef up the Cindy article which has low content currently. 108.170.65.170 (talk) 23:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

However, merging this would cause us to have to describe every tornado and its location in the article, which would MASSIVE influx of information that is better off left in a separate article. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 06:51, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But we can always just add the tornado chart as Hink said. Merging doesn’t mean we can’t do that. Then we keep all the info and not make a fork. Win win! 38.108.217.140 (talk) 21:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Both articles are kind of short, and I don't see a good reason why the tornado outbreak should have a separate article, given its length. As I've said before elsewhere, it's better to have as much information as possible on a given subject in one place. It's better to have one strong article than two or three weak ones. I think it would be a good idea to merge this article into Cindy's article, as that would produce a stronger, more comprehensive article, as opposed to what we have right now. All of the other hurricanes with tornado outbreak articles were lengthy articles that needed a content fork. This isn't one of them. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hurricanehink: Since you first suggested this merger a while back, I think you would be interested in this discussion. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - the content can easily fit in the main storm article. I felt the same way when I proposed it back in 2018. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think there is enough information here to keep it. We still don't have a Tornadoes of 2005 list page for tornadoes so I think we should revisit this topic once that happens. There were 44 tornadoes here and I do not believe merging it would do the outbreak justice. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 06:48, 17 February 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.