Talk:National Weather Service bulletin for New Orleans region
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Tropical cyclones, which collaborates on tropical cyclones and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Tropical cyclones. |
|
The following comments have been left for this page:
I would like to suggest that a comparison be done between what the bulletin predicted and the actual damage, to show how accurate the prediction was. - Montréalais 15:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC) (edit) |
|
 |
An entry from National Weather Service bulletin for New Orleans region appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 20 July 2006. |
 |
[edit] To do
- Finish the article with the info about how this message is a recommended "Best practice" now
- Add provenance info (it came originally from the Tampa WFO)
- Find some juicy info about this message on the Congressional Report
- Find the MSNBC story about this message
Titoxd(?!?) 07:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- All those done, what's left to do is to pick a name that actually makes sense... Titoxd(?!?) 23:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Wow, nice article on such an unusual subject. I wouldn't have thought that one Bulletin would warrent an article, but you did a great job making it encyclopediac. The name works, but should have a mention of Katrina in it. Hurricanehink (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Title changed
I hope you don't mind I've been a bit bold in changing the title, but the previous one was really overtechnical, and it is unlikely there exist any other individually notable National Weather Service bulletins for New Orleans. By the way, thanks for this excellent and informative article.--Pharos 21:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- The title needs to be changed again. It should say "National Weather Service Bulletin for Louisiana/Mississippi. "That bulletin was not just for New Orleans, but for the entire NWS New Orleans/Baton Rouge warning area, which includes southeastern Louisiana and southern Mississippi. I will make changes in the article to reflect that. - --Bdj95 03:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- True, but it was from the "New Orleans" office, so I still think we should go with that in the name. Is the region otherwise precisely defined?--Pharos 12:07, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Look here and down at the New Orleans forecast area, in the tan color. That's the area this was issued for. -WindRunner 13:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- OK, then what if we call it "New Orleans region", then? Or maybe something else to that effect?--Pharos 13:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that would probably work the best. WindRunner 15:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good go me. I didn't want the title/article to give an illusion that an entire region was ignored. And the actual office is "NWS New Orleans/Baton Rouge." - --Bdj95 19:06, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that would probably work the best. WindRunner 15:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- OK, then what if we call it "New Orleans region", then? Or maybe something else to that effect?--Pharos 13:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Look here and down at the New Orleans forecast area, in the tan color. That's the area this was issued for. -WindRunner 13:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- True, but it was from the "New Orleans" office, so I still think we should go with that in the name. Is the region otherwise precisely defined?--Pharos 12:07, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- The title needs to be changed again. It should say "National Weather Service Bulletin for Louisiana/Mississippi. "That bulletin was not just for New Orleans, but for the entire NWS New Orleans/Baton Rouge warning area, which includes southeastern Louisiana and southern Mississippi. I will make changes in the article to reflect that. - --Bdj95 03:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
---
[edit] Merge?
I know that the members of the tropical cyclone project can be quite protective of articles, but I honestly don't know why this can't be merged into Hurricane Katrina. I know that article is already long, and is a FA and FAs deserve daughter articles and so on, but it's not clear to me after having read both articles why this subject needs its own article, particularly as so much of the space here is devoted to reprinting the bulletin. I know that this bulletin was a significant aspect of the hurricane, but I'm still not totally convinced it warrants an entire article.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 15:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think enough info is here to keep it separate, given the impact of the bulletin. Hurricanehink (talk) 15:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- It seems to me that the "impact" paragraph is the only uniquely notable part of the article; but it's so short that I think it could be safely merged.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 18:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Good point, but the entire text of the bulletin is rather notable and interesting, such that merging it to the 100kb Hurricane Katrina article would require to simply summarize it. In fact, it might not even be notable enough to be mentioned in the main article. I don't know. If you want to get further comments from other users, the WPTC has a page for potentially merged articles. Hurricanehink (talk) 19:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- It seems to me that the "impact" paragraph is the only uniquely notable part of the article; but it's so short that I think it could be safely merged.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 18:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
