Talk:Tornado records

message: Umm ok why are the 80's so special?? Were there no deadly tornadoes in the 70's? Or even the 60's for that mater?DPM 21:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There certainly were deadly tornadoes in every decade preceding and following the 1980s, but the '80s are considered by some to have been a relative low point in tornado activity, especially violent activity - and violent tornadoes have historically caused the most deaths on average. However, the Saragosa event of 1987 was far from being a sole outlier in an otherwise lull. Other major events of the 1980s included the 1989 Huntsville, AL tornado, which killed 21; the 1985 outbreak in OH and PA which was the worst on record for that region; and the 1984 Carolinas outbreak which included several F4 tornadoes and caused 57 deaths. Perhaps a list of deadliest tornadoes by year or by decade would be better, and would show death toll trends better than highlighting one event from one decade. CapeFearWX 03:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Deadliest tornado of the 80's" 

message: A tornado occurring at a specific date and time doesnt seem to be much of a coincidence.  I'm sure if you look hard enough you could find one at 12:34 on 5/6 of one year...it's just not that spectacular of an occurrance.  Plus, it was 11:11 PM, which is 23:11 in many countries.  I'm going to remove it. -Runningonbrains 22:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coincidence? 

message: The SPC top 10 damage table has some serious problems and shouldn't be used.  For starters, it only goes back to the beginning of Storm Data.  Second, the use of the central values in the damage category that were used up through 1995 creates some really odd values, given the breadth of the categories (e.g., 50 million-500 million is designated as 250 million.)  This is especially troublesome given that some of the cases actually have damage amounts in the text entry in Storm Data (the paper copies, not necessarily the online approximation.)  As an example of this problem, combined with another problem, the first entry, with $1,250,000,000 in 1973 dollars is the Conyers, GA tornado.  In the paper version of Storm Data, the damage is given as $89M for the tornado.  This gets translated using the central value as $250M, nearly tripling the damage from the reported value.  In addition, for that case, the tornado hit a total of 5 counties.  In the online Storm Data, each county is credited as having $250M in damage (the central value of the class).  When it gets taken from the county-based description back to the total track, that results in a total of $1,250M compared to the actual reported damage from the text description of $89M, a factor of 14 overestimate.  On the other hand, the Wichita Falls tornado gets underestimated since the reported damage was $400M.
This doesn't even take into account the fact that inflation-adjustment is probably not the correct adjustment to make in any event.  Wealth adjustment is probably more representative.  A better reference to the history of damage, starting with the historical work on collecting damage estmates done by Tom Grazulis, is Brooks and Doswell (2001), which gives both inflation and wealth adjustment numbers going back to 1890.  From that, the Oklahoma City tornado is the most damaging tornado when an inflation adjustment is applied, and 11th most damaging when wealth-adjustment is applied.  1896 St. Louis, is the damaging tornado by that metric, in US history. Hebrooks87 20:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.  Why is that even on the SPC site?  Edwards or whomever should know better than publicizing data in that way. Evolauxia 07:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I had no idea the data was so inaccurate.  I assumed an SPC page would be accurate enough.  Will correct using the source given. -RunningOnBrains 18:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, the newly updated damages list pretty well matches that found in Grazulis' newer book, The Tornado: Nature's Ultimate Windstorm (ISBN # 0-8061-3258-2). The one discrepancy is that Grazulis ranks the Omaha, NE tornado of 1975 lower, placing it between the St. Louis and Xenia events in adjusted damage. His listing of approx. $111 million in (unadjusted) damages comes from a 1976 article in the Omaha Sunday World-Herald which apparently estimated the final damage total at $111,234,732. At any rate, both that total and the one on this page are much lower than the $500 million to $1 billion estimates that used to be quoted for that storm (including on the SPC page!). Anyway, glad to see the updates. CapeFearWX 03:46, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most damaging 

message: Why is the Joplin tornado listed as the deadliest in Missouri history? Should the 1896 St. Louis tornado take that title with its 255 deaths versus Joplin's ~160? Or were a significant number of the St. Louis Tornado's fatalities in Illinois? TornadoLGS (talk) 00:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The JLN total exceeds the confirmed count from the Missouri side in 1896, which was 137 in STL (with 118 more in ESTL). It is likely that in 1896 scores more were killed and weren't counted for various reasons, most notably that many people living on boats or the shoreline floated downriver and were also often poor, who tend to be undercounted. The Joplin tornado is exceptional in being the deadliest tornado since 1947. High death tolls occurred every few years til 1953, after which nothing of that order occurred until 2011 (and JLN was an exceptional event in an exceptional year). Evolauxia (talk) 00:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joplin Vs. St Louis 

message: During the 1985 tornado outbreak in Pennsylvania there was a F4 in the Moshannon/Sproul State Forest that was at least 2.5 miles wide. Maccoat (talk) 00:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It may at least be worth a mention, but I've found varying figures on the size of that tornado. The most consistent figure I've found is 2.2 miles. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you help me to find some sources?Maccoat (talk) 22:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Widest Tornadoes Contestant  

message: It seems the article is getting a steady stream of vandalism from IP users. Is it enough to warrant semi-protection? TornadoLGS (talk) 16:36, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protection? 

message: According to the National Weather Service, the El Reno EF5 tornado of May 31, 2013 was 2.6 miles wide.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.89.119 (talk) 17:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That probably will be disputed for some time to come, despite all the recent talk about the El Reno storm.  Note that the Mulhall, OK tornado of 1999 (see 1999 Oklahoma Tornado Outbreak talk page for citation) was, by some measurements, as much as twice that size. 72.0.15.8 (talk) 17:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

text: I made an edit today to the Widest Damage Width section; the Diameter of Maximum Winds figure for the Mulhall, OK tornado was cited as 1600 feet when it was actually 1600 meters (=5200 feet or ~ 1 mile).  This is supported in the 1999 Oklahoma Tornado Outbreak page (q.v.), where there is more extensive discussion and citation of the Mulhall storm.  Regards, 72.0.15.8 (talk) 15:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Widest Tornado Record 

message: I want to get other opinions, but should we have a section titled, "Most documented F5/EF-5 tornadoes in one day", or even "Most documented F5/EF-5 tornadoes in one tornado outbreak"? I think the first one is probably unnessecary, as the max is probably 2-3. The most F5s tornadoes in one outbreak would probably be more noteworthy. But I'd like to get some second opinions. - 1morey July 19, 2013 3:19 PM (EST)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1morey (talk • contribs)  
:As it turns out most in a day and most in a single outbreak are the same in this case (7 F5 tornadoes on April 3, 1974) which is already mentioned under "Most tornadoes in single 24-hour period" TornadoLGS (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a new section 

message: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/damage$.htm
as you see its changed so we need to update it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.118.207.158 (talk) 14:09, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  10 Costliest Tornadoes 

message: What is the significance of having the section for the largest tornado outbreak in the fall? It seems to be a rather odd qualifier and I don't think it is necessary. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it is rather arbitrary, unless all seasons are included. I'm okay with removal. -RunningOnBrains(talk) 04:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest outbreak in the fall 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Tornado records. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110503214406/http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/sd/sd.html to http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/IPS/sd/sd.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why is this a thing? Several EF5s have been confirmed to an absolute certainty since then, especially in 2011, with the last recorded being Moore 2013. Why would NOAA dispute these at all? Are they just stubborn idiots????? Makes no sense.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C5:8100:BA0:94CC:E5DC:963E:C450 (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some instances where they gave a rating to a tornado that was lower than what other scientists though it warranted, and there was at least one scenario where the reverse happened if I recall correctly. Dustin (talk) 20:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  EF5 rated tornadoes Disputed by NOAA since 2007? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Tornado records. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120919111413/http://www.tornadoproject.com/alltorns/bangladesh.htm to http://www.tornadoproject.com/alltorns/bangladesh.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121023050804/http://www.weather.com/blog/weather/8_8982.html?from=blog_permalink_mainindex&ref=%2Fblog%2Fweather%2F&loc=interstitialskip to http://www.weather.com/blog/weather/8_8982.html?from=blog_permalink_mainindex&ref=%2Fblog%2Fweather%2F&loc=interstitialskip
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Tornado records. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130926235427/http://wmo.asu.edu/tornado-largest-tornado-outbreak to http://wmo.asu.edu/tornado-largest-tornado-outbreak
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/5sZWvfQp8?url=http://www.cswr.org/dow/DOW.htm to http://www.cswr.org/dow/DOW.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071112001042/http://wmo.asu.edu/world-lowest-sea-level-air-pressure-excluding-tornadoes to http://wmo.asu.edu/world-lowest-sea-level-air-pressure-excluding-tornadoes
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: so for exceptional coincidences , i find Tuscaloosa/Birmingham should be there , a lot of F4/F5 have hit there a lot of times
, and St Louis , infact ive read somewhere that i cant find now... about st Louis had it worst then Moore Oklahoma.
there are others that im unsure that should be there but i have been wondering about it... like Lazbuddie, Texas for 2 different days of having this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubuz-V4RO94 , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ0rOXM_ArE
And at southwestern Corfu there were 32 waterspouts within a hour from one storm cell... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0skeowmIDw
and what about the Pilger event? or dodge city event? having multiple strong violent tornadoes all over the place at the same time.
As for tornado damage width for example there should be a graph of the largest tornadoes of over 2 + miles wide , including the noaa official path width and the disputed max width , example el reno tornado 2.6 mile wide for official and 4.2 mile wide for disputed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshoctober16 (talk • contribs) 11:47, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  more for Exceptional coincidences and extra data for others 

message: at first i tougth it was some troll , but i keep noticing it never stop and was all over the place , found a forum with a bunch of people acting as if it happend , then i started to find sattelite imagery  , then finnely youtube vids... however still no proof on how much tornadoes happen, but some one posted somthing on my talk page , and i found this http://archivo.laarena.com.ar/el_pais-a-25-anos-de-la-noche-de-los-tornados-1206122-113.html issue is it still dose'nt tell how much tornadoes and how long this lasted just more then 100 tornadoes i dont know if this is 24 hours or not but ive been wondering now why is there almost no record of this event? why is it so secretive? https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleada_de_tornados_de_Buenos_Aires_de_1993 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiny4xJ-7do Joshoctober16 (talk) 03:30, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: i think we do have good amount of proof to add it kinda however the real count of tornado isnt realy put it all it states is 23 hours of 100+ tornadoes https://www.facebook.com/SMN.ar/posts/1843453979040727/ Joshoctober16 (talk) 03:33, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  the apparent possible 300 tornado in one day in south america... 

message: Just noticed this inconsistency in the "Exceptional survivors" section: "On March 12, 2006 he was carried 1,307 feet (398 m), 13 feet (4.0 m) shy of one-quarter mile (400 m)"
398 plus 4 is 402, so I'm wondering if someone mistyped the second measurement. 
-Yoshinion (on mobile) 
2600:1004:B04F:2BD1:65EE:53B8:1B1D:6600 (talk) 12:00, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It think it's just an  issue of rounding. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  400 - 398 = 2, not 4 

message: It has been recently discovered that the the first tornado of the Pilger Tornado family (part of the June 16–18, 2014 outbreak), towards the end of it's life, was sling-shotted by the forming Wakefield tornado to a speed of roughly 94.6 mph, over 20 mph faster than the tri-state tornado, and held it for roughly 5-10 seconds. Should we nominate it as the fastest moving tornado on record? 
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMws8ueXJ7U. JustAnotherWikiUser0816 (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not yet. See the hidden comment I left on the section for fastest forward speed. While I don't doubt that Hank et al. know what they're talking about, a YouTube video is generally not considered a reliable source. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#YouTube. Though I would not be terribly surprised if this ends up in a scientific paper, which we could cite.TornadoLGS (talk) 22:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Im fully aware that YouTube isn't a reliable source, I've been looking for a more acceptable source to use but since this is recently public I doubt there will be one for a couple days atleast. Until so I do agree on waiting, therefore, nominate, not outright declare yet. JustAnotherWikiUser0816 (talk) 06:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If a journal article is in the works it could take a few months. TornadoLGS (talk) 19:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fastest Moving Tornado 

message: 1:Dow seems to use M/s alot and somtimes mentions MPH , this makes alot of confusion with 1999 2013 record , one is at 301 and the other at 302 , however its stated both were 135 M/s meaning both should be the same number , rounds up at 301.986 mph , the real info use m/s , so we should likely use this instead. 
2:also on may 24 of this year if no EF5 happen , then the EF5 drought record will be broken , so if none happens before may 24 , and its may 24 come and change up this record.Joshoctober16 (talk) 03:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 things , should we change the fastest winds from mph/kmph to ms/mph and if no EF5 happen before may 24. 

message: Hi  it strikes me as quite odd having lists (and navboxes at that) appear in sections labeled as superlatives. For example, the subsection Deadliest single tornado in world history suddenly has a navbox that lists the deadliest tornadoes in Canada (?). The U.S. navbox lists are a little more fitting, but still fall under superlative headings like Deadliest single tornado in US history and Most damaging tornado, which describe a single event, rather than a collection of events. In other words, the section headings don't describe the sections' content, or the sections' content doesn't fit the section headings. When I was reading this, I found it quite jarring and took me a bit to figure out what was going on. My solution — to move the navbox lists under a new section heading that at least attempts to describe its content — might not be the best one. Do you think there is a better way to fix this, or do you not think it a problem at all? Thanks, Brycehughes (talk) 02:18, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , pinging to see if you had a chance to look at the above. I'll revert back for now, but feel free to revert again if you think it's worth discussing here. Brycehughes (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navbox lists in superlative sections 

message: Would it be possible to change the highest speed record from the Tri-State Tornado to the 93mph record set by the Pilger EF4 in 2014? Or is what is listed the highest average speed? Theforge129 (talk) 20:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: ya that is somthing i kept forgeting to talk about , pilger seem to have been moving 96+ mph in foward speed at one moment , however last year in december some tornado warning storms were moving 110 mph , im unsure if some had tornadoes or not but one that had a average moving speed of 90 mph did had a tornado it seem. Joshoctober16 (talk) 21:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's the top speed (The Tri State tornado's record was 73 mph, but its average speed was 62 mph). The issue is that the source for the speed of the Pilger tornado is a YouTube video from a personal channel, which, as user-generated content does not qualify as a reliable source for reference purposes. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pilger speed record? 

message: , , . I have not found any sources except ESWD for this, but a F4/T9 tornado in Germany on July 1, 1891 had a forward speed of about 300 km/h. (ESWD does not mention the forward speed, but says 20km path length in 4 minutes). Almost certainly a mistake, but ESSL's ESWD does have it listed. I went ahead and put it in the highest forward speed section and specified that Tri-State is still the highest accepted. Weird, so I ain't too sure what to do. I came across it when building the List of F4 and EF4 tornadoes. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: 5 km/m? WTH is that? I HIGHLY doubt that. I think we should just leave the detail out entirely. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 16:20, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I am very certain it is a mistake. I am in agreement to leave it out as well (well remove it since I added it earlier). But, I ain’t sure what to really do here since ESSL is a reliable source and it technically is a major tornado. I want to remove it since I am certain it is a mistake, but at the same time, that would be WP:OR, since we do have a source saying it, albeit, a single source. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave it out or try to submit an inquiry somewhere to find out. United States Man (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I say we exercise WP:COMMONSENSE and remove it. There is clearly an error somewhere, and we already know that old tornado records should be taken with a grain of salt. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:08, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  The nightmare of doing the older tornado pages has indeed taught me that well. Its hard to differentiate between the NCEI, CDNS, and Storm Data. I'm glad I'm doing it though. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 02:33, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

text: I went ahead and took it out. United States Man (talk) 02:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 16:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  1891 Germany forward speed 

message: The March 31st-April 1st tornado outbreak is now tied 3rd most active within a 24 hour period with 132 tornadoes confirmed within 24 hours. How should we handle situations like this when they occur? ChrisWx (talk - contribs) 00:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most active tornado outbreaks now tied 

message: While watching a Pecos Hank video, I stumbled upon a comment that said, according to a news report he found, an F2 tornado tracked 235 miles across Louisiana into far northwest Mississippi, I became curious and with a quick search, I found a KJAS article mentioning an F2 tornado that tracked 234 miles, killing two and injuring 22, they said it was according to Tornado Archive, so I checked out the tornado archive map and I found the F2 tornado they talked about, It tracked 234.7 miles, It's unbelievable, Should I include it? SomeoneWiki04 (talk) 13:57, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I am gonna include it, feel free to remove it if I did something wrong SomeoneWiki04 (talk) 09:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  1953 F2 tornado in Louisiana