Jump to content

Talk:2011 Cordova–Blountsville tornado

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Royiswariii talk 05:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Created by EF5 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

EF5 18:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • (Note: article title is now 2011 Cordova–Blountsville tornado). @EF5: New enough and long enough. QPQ present. Multiple paragraphs in the tornado summary section lack inline citations, presumably ones already being used in other paragraphs. Hook facts check out, though ALT0 reads a bit blandly right now. I'd like to see some reworded hooks, such as these, and would like feedback once you fix the missing inline cites: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:49, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: Done. ALT1a actually looks perfect. EF5 21:51, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see the inline cites are fixed. (Having reviewed tornadoes at GAN, I just figured it was a need for extra citations to the tornado summary etc.) We should be good to go as the hook facts check out. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 22:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Perhaps a different title

[edit]

I'm not too keen on this title, since it could refer to a number of tornadoes in the same outbreak, including the 2011 Tuscaloosa-Birmingham tornado. Perhaps 2011 Cordova–Blountsville tornado? TornadoLGS (talk) 22:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, why not, seems logical enough. I don't believe this tornado was ever commonly "named", just a slew of "Cullman County" and "Cordova". EF5 22:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:08, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2011 Cordova–Blountsville tornado/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: EF5 (talk · contribs) 16:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: PCN02WPS (talk · contribs) 16:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Claiming this review as part of GARC, comments to come. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • devastating several communities along a 127.8-mile (205.7 km) path, including Cordova and Blountsville → devastating several communities, including Cordova and Blountsville, along a 127.8-mile (205.7 km) path makes more sense to me since the non-restrictive appositive refers to the communities rather than the path
@PCN02WPS:  Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • the largest tornado outbreak in modern history, and was one of eleven EF4 tornadoes → remove comma (WP:CINS)
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • where it retained EF0 and EF1 intensity → the word "retained" seems out of place here - if the tornado is strengthening, then "retained" makes it seem like it's staying the same intensity
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • it reached EF3 intensity, and heavily damaged the town → remove comma
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The tornado was the second EF3+ tornado to hit Cordova on April 27 → readers that may be unfamiliar with the EF scale might assume that "EF3+" is a specific variant of an "EF3" rating; might want to spell it out like The tornado was the second tornado of at least EF3 intensity to hit Cordova on April 27 or something similar
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Four people were killed in the downtown area of the town → Four people were killed in downtown Cordova to eliminate repetition within that sentence (even though "Cordova" is repeated in the previous sentence)
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Meteorological synopsis

  • towards the Arklatex and the Ozarks, and later into the lower Ohio Valley → I believe this can go without a comma
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • reaching the northwest Alabama border around 2:00 a.m. CDT → Might consider linking "CDT" to Central Time Zone on first mention just in case (don't have to spell it out, just a link would suffice IMO)
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • as supercells began to line up to the southwest of the area → which "area" is being referred to here?
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • upgrade to a High Risk for severe weather → does "High Risk" need to be capitalized?
 Done, fixed. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • for severe weather around 1:00 p.m. CDT → is this time referring to the time of the warning or the time of the predicted impact of the severe weather?
  • be hit hours later, notably Cordova → consider including Cordova or something similar, since "notably" is included on the list of words to watch under MOS:EDITORIAL
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • rapidly intensifying to EF3 intensity → a little too repetitive (emphasis is mine)
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The tornado damaged numerous brick buildings in the area, and uprooting several trees before lifting a short distance north of the town → remove comma before "and". The tense also changes halfway through the sentence ("and uprooted several trees" rather than "uprooting")
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado summary

  • retained this intensity, and widened → remove comma
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • before moving into Tuscaloosa County → remove link since Tuscaloosa County is linked in the previous paragraph
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • remaining debris being thrown a considerable distance → "considerable distance" is sort of meaningless here - is there anything quantitative that could be listed instead?
 Done, I've just removed the "considerable distance". EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • with debris thrown a considerable distance → same issue as above
 Done As above.EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • It then weakened to EF1 strength → Starting the paragraph with "The tornado" would be best
 Done. 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  • were either damaged or destroyed in this area along with many trees being downed → tense switches from past "damaged or destroyed" to present "being downed"
 Done. 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  • As it continued to the south-southwest of Garden City → As the tornado continued... as above
 Done. 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Aftermath

  • The city of Cordova was awarded $5,098,515 → consider using {{Inflation}} as follows: The city of Cordova was awarded $5,098,515 (equivalent to $7,127,000 in 2024) or something similar. This means you can remove "2011 USD" while replacing it with even more useful information. (You can copy my code if you like)
 Done. 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Blount County was awarded $758,572 (2011 USD). → same as above
 Done. 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Recovery efforts after the tornadoes continued months after the event → Recovery efforts continued for months after the tornadoes for simplicity
 Done. 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  • numerous fires started in downtown Cordova → was this as a result of damage done by the tornado, or just a coincidence?
Started in the aftermath of the tornado (power lines, gas lines, broken pipes, etc.), but I'll note that. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The ordinance was highly controversial, and was met with nationwide backlash → remove comma
 Done. EF5 14:06, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

@PCN02WPS: Reminder ping. :) EF5 20:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@EF5 Very sorry to keep you waiting! I will have some time at the airport tomorrow so I'll get the second read-over and the spotcheck done then. Thank you for being so patient. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:23, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minor note

  • The city of Cordova was awarded $5,098,515 equivalent to $6,906,000 in 2023 to aid with recovery efforts → The city of Cordova was awarded $5,098,515 (equivalent to $6,906,000 in 2023) to aid with recovery efforts

Spot check

Checking randomly-selected references:

  • FN 1: appears to be a deadlink, recommend |url-status=dead in reference.
    • (a) verified
    • (b) close paraphrasing issue with South of Oakman, numerous trees were snapped and uprooted, a cell phone tower was knocked down, and mobile homes were destroyed at EF2 intensity compared to source material The tornado moved across Alabama State Highway 69 several miles south of Oakman where numerous trees were snapped and uprooted, a cell phone tower was knocked down, and mobile homes were destroyed (EF-2).
NWS publications are in the public domain. EF5 16:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The more you know! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • (c) same sort of close paraphrasing issues as above; I know there's not that many ways to list different things that are damaged but these wordings are near-identical
    • (d) not verified, nothing about Arkadelphia, the cinder block construction home, the car, or the storm shelter in the source that I can see
 Done. EF5 16:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • (e) WP: A large portion of one of the homes was wiped off of its foundation, source: A large portion of the home was wiped off of its foundation - also no mention of the dump truck getting thrown 30 feet
 Done, removed. EF5 16:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • (f) verified
  • FN 8: verified
  • FN 9: This looks like a duplicate reference of FN 1, but verified
I don't believe it is, I may be wrong though. EF5 16:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN 11: does not cover really any of that paragraph
 Done, removed. EF5 16:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN 19: verified
  • FN 21: verified
  • FN 24: verified
  • FN 25: verified
  • FN 26: verified
  • FN 28: verified

@EF5: Just a few refs to look at and a duplicate to fix and this should be good to go. The references could use some formatting (standardizing titles, including author names, linking and formatting website/publisher names, date formatting, etc.) but that's not necessary for GA so I'll just leave it as a suggestion. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 06:14, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PCN02WPS: How's it look? EF5 16:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looking good! Happy to pass, nice work. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:06, 31 January 2025 (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.

Two questions

[edit]

@MarioProtIV: and @Departure–: Two things:
1. If the Hackleburg tornado's path was shortened (which Mario seems to have implemented at Hackleburg tornado) would that make this tornado the longest-tracked of the outbreak?
2. Should that be mentioned somewhere in the article, maybe under WP:IAR? — EF5 15:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I e-mailed NWS Huntsville not too long ago and they confirmed the Cordova-Blountsville tornado was the longest of the outbreak in Alabama, and since I don't see anything longer elsewhere, I don't see why it shouldn't be reflected as such here. There was an NWS page on the super outbreak that verified this (misspelling Blountsville, which is why I e-mailed them). Departure– (talk) 15:29, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Huh. Which report/page was that? They have just about a million. — EF5 15:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2011_Cordova–Blountsville_tornado&oldid=1289428640"