Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tornado emergency

Add links
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 keep. There was no support for the page being deleted. A significant number of editors are looking to merge the article but it is for those editors to propose and promote the merge as a normal post-AfD editorial action. TerriersFan 22:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado emergency[edit]

The National Weather Service issues no such product defined as "Tornado Emergency". In fact, the article itself states "A Tornado Emergency is simply enhanced wording added, (at the discretion of the forcasters working the event), to a standard Tornado Warning". (emphasis mine) The Severe weather terminology (United States) page indicates that it is unofficial (which it kinda is). It is simply a stronger "call to action" used in a Tornado Warning product. For those reasons, I allege it fails to meet notability standards. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 06:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC) NB: I also link to Talk:Tornado warning#Suggested merging of "tornado emergency" into tornado warning in the interest of full disclosure. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 06:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Unofficial or not, it seems the NWS has used this designation, and it doesn't mean the same as a Tornado Warning. Might I suggest, however, merging Watch, Warning, and Emergency into a single article? Or was it that way before? --UsaSatsui 21:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Merge. You know, after some searching, I'm not seeing any usage of this term outside of those announcements. I'm taking away my "keep" opinion unless someone can show a source outside a "flee for your life" bulletin. The weatherman who decided to coin it on a whim to get across the seriousness of the event isn't cutting it for me. As it stands, put it into Warning (and I still think merge Watch into there too.) --UsaSatsui 05:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Three reasons it should be kept:
1. When discussed at Talk:Tornado warning#Suggested merging of "tornado emergency" into tornado warning, it was decided that it should not be merged into a seperate article, with almost all who discussed it stating that the term tornado emergency was coined to differentiate the situation from a typical tornado warning.
2. I e-mailed the National Weather Service in Norman, OK, asking about tornado emergencies.[1] Forecaster Cheryl Sharpe responded to my e-mail, saying in part:

"I don't remember exactly how [David Andrea] disseminated [the tornado emergency] (probably in an SPS [Special Weather Statement] or SVS), but he did it because a large and intense tornado was approaching a relatively large metropolitan area. The terminology was intended to convey the exceptional seriousness of the event."

3. To all of you who think this article should be deleted, I ask you, if a tornado emergency were issued for your area, would you be more inclined than you normaly would to seek shelter? --Ks0stm 21:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, sure. But that doesn't make it an official term. If they issued a "Huge F*cking Tornado Warning", I'd be more inclined to act, but I wouldn't consider "Huge F*cking Tornado" a technical term. --UsaSatsui 05:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In the event of a tornado... how many of us would actually have our hands on a copy of the actual bulletin from the National Weather Service to know that there is some tornado emergency? It's not as if it's issued under a special code. If the Emergency Alert System goes off, you're going to see Tornado Warning. "Tornado Emergency" is a "call to action" (An I use that as an official NWS term) statement, of which there are many. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 09:33, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is used because most people are paying attention to the media when a tornado warning is in effect for their area, and will get the tornado emergency message through the media. As I recall, the fact that people watch the media for weather information is the reason they have have meteorologists employed at most television stations. --Ks0stm 21:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and most people will simply be told a Tornado Warning has been issued. NOBODY reads the ENTIRE NWS bulletin on air. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 18:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All of the major television stations in the Wichita, KS television market do if they are in continuous coverage, and as I recall, they all were when the EF-5 hit Greensburg back in May. --Ks0stm 12:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep

A tornado emergency is a rare, but important statement. The article should be kept to inform people what a tornado emergency is, and it is to large to merge with tornado warning. Southern Illinois SKYWARN 00:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC) 22:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • No, it's not too big. There's one paragraph and 4 reprints of NWS bulletins. Cut the bulletins, paste the paragraph. Easy merge. --UsaSatsui 05:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as others note (and as noted in the article) it is a rare occurence for the NWS to give the broadcaster the option of adding "tornado emergency" to the "tornado warning". Mandsford 23:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the term does exist and is rarely used as the above mentionned and I remember that it was used during the Greensburg EF5 tornado back in may. Although alternately it can be merged in the the tornado warning or tornado with the occurences of those mentionned in the associate tornado events/outbreaks including twice in the May 2007 Outbreak - Greensburg (May 4) and Great Bend (May 5)--JForget 00:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. It is a critical note to indicate the very rare events that a violent and extremely life-threatening tornado is headed for a populated area. That in itself indicates it is one of the highest level of alerts the NWS has. CrazyC83 01:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Although very rare it is important to the public to give them the real sense that you better get down or get away form this thing. It should be labeled as low importance because for the average person you don't need to know it but if you are looking it up then it should be there for you. -Wxweenie91 (talk) 01:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge & Redirect would be appropriate since there are no solid sources to get it past WP:NEO. Corpx 01:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actual NWS emergency announcements using the term aren't "solid sources"? The National Weather Service isn't exactly a bunch of schoolkids coming up with kewl n00 werdz, they're a scientific organization with actual science and everything. I don't see how WP:NEO applies. --UsaSatsui 03:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:NEO, it needs "reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term—not books and papers that use the term" Corpx 03:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, the National Weather Service. They're reliable enough (as reliable as weather forecasters can be, anyways). They're one of the foremost authorities on the subject, and they use the term, and I'm sure it's not something some rogue weatherman conjured up for fun: it's a clearly defined term with a clearly defined meaning (like Watch and Warning).
The issue isn't whether or not the term or the event is notable per se...I'm sure we can all agree tornadoes and the terms used to warn us about them are notable enough. It's whether or not it's significantly different from a tornado warning to merit it's own article (in other words, does it have enough notability to stand on it's own?). In a sense, it is just a more severe warning, and doesn't seem to have the "official" status of the other terms (yet). --UsaSatsui 05:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"...about the term—not books and papers that use the term...". The National Weather Service USES the term. They don't write ABOUT the term, except in passing to say "Yeah, we used this a couple of times.". --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 09:33, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, or merge as per Evolauxia below. The second reference talks about the use of the term.

Tornado Emergency... It became apparent that unique and eye-catching phrases needed to be included in the products. … we used the phrase 'Tornado Emergency' to paint the picture that a rare and deadly tornado was imminent in the metro area. We hoped that such dire phrases would prompt action from anyone that still had any questions about what was about to happen.

Its a secondary source discussing the subject briefly, but directly. This is well on the way to establishing notability. --SmokeyJoe 07:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • So how is it different from the equally descriptive phrases, "Extremely dangerous and life-threatening situation", "Take cover now to protect your life", and "This is an emergency situation", none of which have articles? I still haven't seen any evidence it's an official term. Just one that gets used a lot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by UsaSatsui (talk • contribs) 14:17, August 22, 2007 (UTC).
    It is different in the fact that those are part of the "call to action", which exists inside of the "tornado warning/tornado emergency". --Ks0stm 21:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    That just makes no sense. You're saying because the extra descriptive term is at the top of the message, rather than in the middle, it gets special status? --UsaSatsui 02:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with tornado warning and redirect. The term is not official and not standalone, it is an enhanced call-to-action statement used in tornado warnings and severe weather statements (updates on tornado warnings). Unlike actual products, there are no official guidelines, it was first invented on the spot and is used at forecaster discretion. Evolauxia 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment You know what would really swing this for the keep voters? Bring something up that clearly defines a Tornado Emergency. Tornado Watch, Tornado Warning, Severe Thunderstorm, Hurricane, and so on all have clearly defined terms issued by the NWS. Find one for Tornado Emergency. That will clear things up. --UsaSatsui 02:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge as Evoluxia said it best above. They are simply not a product that you commonly see, and they are never issued on their own. Also, as another point, the Flash flood emergency redirects to the "Emergency" section in the Flash Flood Warning article. WindRunner 15:41, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Tornado warning.Harlowraman 19:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge would be best for the moment, I think. Burntsauce 20:46, 27 August 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tornado_emergency&oldid=1068836349"