Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012-13 United States winter storm season
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete; article author requested deletion in this edit. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 05:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2012-13 United States winter storm season[edit]
- 2012-13 United States winter storm season (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested prod. Winter storm naming scheme that was created by The Weather Channel and doesn't seem to have been accepted beyond that. The only third-party reference is a Yahoo News article announcing the scheme. Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 22:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- How about instead of deleting everything people think doesn't qualify, help make it better. It is a brand new concept that has been introduced and information is limited at the time being. Please do not delete it, it is something that is important that should be added to Wikipedia. So what if there is only two references, I've seen pages with no references, and they have been kept for more than two years. I don't find that very fair, this has enough information to provide the public about the new concept. KEEP STO12 (talk) 22:49, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- While I appreciate that you want to tell the public about a new concept, here in Wikipedia concepts must catch on before the Wikipedia article is created, not the other way around. What I'm saying is, this is way too soon for a Wikipedia article about a naming scheme that might get booted before it even gets off the ground. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and Re-title to Northern Hemisphere Winter storms of 2012-13 to be consistent with other articles that exist (or use to exist). All wind storm season, like hurricane season, are inherently notable. Not everything needs to be deleted. There is no limit for the number of articles. YE Pacific Hurricane 22:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Aww, why does it need to be moved to that? The Weather Channel is only naming systems that affect the United States, I don't think it should be moved to that. STO12 (talk) 22:55, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The storms may be individually notable, but we're talking about the notability of the naming scheme here, not that of the storms themselves. Since the NOAA hasn't adopted this naming scheme, we'll mention it only if it's notable on its own. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There isn't a set of winter storm articles, and IMO nor should there be. Wait to see if the names get some widespread significance before recreating, IMO. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – I would wait to see if these names become of significance and if they're actually widely used (there may be consequences for the TWC doing this without NOAA's consent) before giving it an article. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:08, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Without NOAA's concent? They are a part of NOAA, they don't technically have to ask about it, and this is a one-hundred percent thing, they said that they "WILL" be doing this this winter season. STO12 (talk) 23:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The TWC is not part of NOAA. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- As Hink said, The Weather Channel is definitely not part of the NOAA. They are a private organization. And to be honest, it doesn't really matter if they say they WILL, they can easily be shut down if they don't comply. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Still, there is no point in asking about it, there is no "national center" that tracks these events, the "National Weather Service" slightly tracks them, but the national weather service is dispersed throughout different states, so there is no major group organization such as the "National Hurricane Center" for these events (they are only tracking major snowstorms, not snow in general). STO12 (talk) 23:18, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- But is the purpose of this article to cover the winter storms in the US, or is it mostly because of the naming list? If the former, than there is precedent for not having an article. Several "winter storm" sort of articles have been deleted in the past, largely because there is no definition for what constitutes that. Should a storm that dropped 2 inches of snow be included automatically? What about winter storms that don't get named by the Weather Channel? It's far too early to see if this naming list will become accepted. We should wait and see; perhaps then we could come up with a title that reflects the naming list. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:31, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- South Atlantic tropical cyclone has no definition for what constitutes that either. YE Pacific Hurricane 23:35, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a tropical cyclone in the South Atlantic Ocean, and I don't see what that has to do with this article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, they both have on thing in common IMO. They kinda don't have a definition for what constitutes that as the SATL one AFAIk contains systems that were not widely known as TC's. YE Pacific Hurricane 23:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- They are completely different, and need I remind you that Other stuff exists? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That was just a general comment, not really a deletion argument, so I guess WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST does not really appear to apply here (though it could apply to what I said above). YE Pacific Hurricane 00:33, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- But you used SATC as an example of an article that doesn't have a proper definition. For this article, there is no definition. Would this apply to winter storms affecting Alaska, for example? And what exactly is a winter storm? Something that produces snowfall in the United States? That's far too vague to be a legitimate article. If you limit it to only the storms named by the Weather Channel, then you run into the problem of placing too much emphasis on an unofficial list by a commercial entity. Furthermore, if there is a storm that produces a significant amount of snow but isn't named, would it be in the article? What about a storm that's named but produces very minimal snow? There is no way to be consistent, particularly with the emphasis on the Weather Channel naming list. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:41, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Um, there is always winter storms in Alaska, they just happen so often it isn't notable anymore. A winter storm is major snow event that produces several inches (and even feet) in snow, its not a couple snow flakes, it's widespread blizzard like what happened in Chicago not too long ago. Winter storms are predicted by looking at the current trend of weather; if all the conditions are right for a major snow storm, then snow storm watches and warnings are issued. It is not just "some storm that produces snowfall", that is just like calling a hurricane a little bit of wind and rain (and that's not what happens, is it). Major snow storms are major storm complexes that spread it effects throughout up to a whole half of the U.S.. The Weather Channel is now beginning to apply for acceptance from NOAA about these names by the way. A snow storm that produces significant accumulations will be named, there is really no "ifs" or "buts" about it, they'll know if it is that bad. Plus, snow producing systems won't automatically be named. Snow storms are kind of like how hurricanes form, a hurricane starts out small, but once it is larger (for a snow storm in this case when it gets larger and produces unusually large amounts of snow) they get named. STO12 (talk) 02:09, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- But nowhere in the title does it say it's limited to a "major snow event". And surely, Alaska gets several storms that gets several feet of snow. Aren't they part of the United States? Furthermore, how do you know how the Weather Channel will apply its naming procedure? Do you know for sure they will do so for a storm that drops several inches of snow? My point is that it's too early to know, since it's an entirely new procedure. We should wait to see if the public takes notice of the names, how they name them, and if there is a consistent title we can use. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:14, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Um, there is always winter storms in Alaska, they just happen so often it isn't notable anymore. A winter storm is major snow event that produces several inches (and even feet) in snow, its not a couple snow flakes, it's widespread blizzard like what happened in Chicago not too long ago. Winter storms are predicted by looking at the current trend of weather; if all the conditions are right for a major snow storm, then snow storm watches and warnings are issued. It is not just "some storm that produces snowfall", that is just like calling a hurricane a little bit of wind and rain (and that's not what happens, is it). Major snow storms are major storm complexes that spread it effects throughout up to a whole half of the U.S.. The Weather Channel is now beginning to apply for acceptance from NOAA about these names by the way. A snow storm that produces significant accumulations will be named, there is really no "ifs" or "buts" about it, they'll know if it is that bad. Plus, snow producing systems won't automatically be named. Snow storms are kind of like how hurricanes form, a hurricane starts out small, but once it is larger (for a snow storm in this case when it gets larger and produces unusually large amounts of snow) they get named. STO12 (talk) 02:09, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- But you used SATC as an example of an article that doesn't have a proper definition. For this article, there is no definition. Would this apply to winter storms affecting Alaska, for example? And what exactly is a winter storm? Something that produces snowfall in the United States? That's far too vague to be a legitimate article. If you limit it to only the storms named by the Weather Channel, then you run into the problem of placing too much emphasis on an unofficial list by a commercial entity. Furthermore, if there is a storm that produces a significant amount of snow but isn't named, would it be in the article? What about a storm that's named but produces very minimal snow? There is no way to be consistent, particularly with the emphasis on the Weather Channel naming list. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:41, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That was just a general comment, not really a deletion argument, so I guess WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST does not really appear to apply here (though it could apply to what I said above). YE Pacific Hurricane 00:33, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- They are completely different, and need I remind you that Other stuff exists? --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, they both have on thing in common IMO. They kinda don't have a definition for what constitutes that as the SATL one AFAIk contains systems that were not widely known as TC's. YE Pacific Hurricane 23:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a tropical cyclone in the South Atlantic Ocean, and I don't see what that has to do with this article. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- South Atlantic tropical cyclone has no definition for what constitutes that either. YE Pacific Hurricane 23:35, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- But is the purpose of this article to cover the winter storms in the US, or is it mostly because of the naming list? If the former, than there is precedent for not having an article. Several "winter storm" sort of articles have been deleted in the past, largely because there is no definition for what constitutes that. Should a storm that dropped 2 inches of snow be included automatically? What about winter storms that don't get named by the Weather Channel? It's far too early to see if this naming list will become accepted. We should wait and see; perhaps then we could come up with a title that reflects the naming list. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:31, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Still, there is no point in asking about it, there is no "national center" that tracks these events, the "National Weather Service" slightly tracks them, but the national weather service is dispersed throughout different states, so there is no major group organization such as the "National Hurricane Center" for these events (they are only tracking major snowstorms, not snow in general). STO12 (talk) 23:18, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- As Hink said, The Weather Channel is definitely not part of the NOAA. They are a private organization. And to be honest, it doesn't really matter if they say they WILL, they can easily be shut down if they don't comply. TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 23:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The TWC is not part of NOAA. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Without NOAA's concent? They are a part of NOAA, they don't technically have to ask about it, and this is a one-hundred percent thing, they said that they "WILL" be doing this this winter season. STO12 (talk) 23:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I hate to do this to STO12, but I think The Weather Channel has gone too far this time. I have said for a long time that I would watch a different weather channel if there was one. I can't even see a decent Tropical Update without them rushing it off so they can cover something that has poped up on Twitter or to review the same viewer-submitted videos every 10 minutes. Anyway, they are owned by NBC, which, according to David Letterman, stands for Never Believe your Contract (referring to Conan-Leno struggle). I don't think something that is owned by one of the major news media companies needs to stick their nose into naming storms. And like Hink said, they hardly say anything about Alaska, which accounts for a big portion of the country and have the most winter storms. United States Man (talk) 02:41, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, everyone's opinions is making me hate the weather channel now. I didn't realize how kind of "dark" it is behind the scenes. We can delete it until it is completely official. Conversation closed, i'll go back to tropical cyclones for awhile, I have a headache from all of this. :/ STO12 (talk) 03:34, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.