This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details.
This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
1974 Super Outbreak is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee
Seeing as how the list of tornadoes for this outbreak is pretty poorly managed and a lot of conflicting info has come about in studies since then. I recently came across Cyclonebiskit's remodeling of this and I’m inclined to move the list stuff over given how much better it looks compared to our current one, however I’m in a bit of an ethical dilemma seeing as how he hasn’t edited in general in two months and abandoned the draft in the summer of 2023 it seems (not sure if it was complete or not). I would WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH here, but want to talk about here first, given we know how old this outbreak was and definitely needs some remodeling to bring it up to standard (to about the 2011 outbreak, which is much better sorted). MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 05:48, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I personally think the formatting is fine, it just needs more citations. I also can't remember the last time we used the "Data from Grazulis 1990/1993", "Data from the NCEI database" etc. — EF511:31, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're gonna need a group of people to help adjust everything in #Confirmed tornadoes to what CB had in his draft(s) list before he abandoned it, since information on the tornadoes in the section prior to the list revamp was different. I certainly can't do it all on my own nor do I have the amount of dedication that he had to finding this information, but a group effort could make this much easier. In general actually the article needs a revamp to bring it up to par with 2011 Super Outbreak, IMO, and it seems he was also compiling non-tornadic effects which this article was severely lacking. Provided he still gives blessing to this since he is retired now (and in the case thats different I can undo that), his work looked incredibly more full of information than what's currently written on the main page. Looking at the edit history, it seems @CapeVerdeWave: here began adding some info before leaving the draft alone, so I wouldn't mind his help if he is fine with that seeing he also works on tornado stuff. As one of the most infamous outbreaks, it sure would be good to have it up to quality standards on the Wiki, no? :) --MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 04:27, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MarioProtIV, Cyclonebiskit, and United States Man: I concur. Perhaps even separate articles can be made for some of the tornadoes themselves, once all the data are used. At any rate, I am willing to help, but to be honest, the task looks daunting, given the nature of the event itself. In particular Cyclonebiskit employed a lot of unofficial or semi-official sources (i.e., Fujita, Grazulis, and NWS reanalyses) for tornado data, so much may need to be reworked there as well; I would definitely recommend keeping the individual Fujita map-numbers as useful referents, however. CapeVerdeWave (talk) 09:16, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Any help’s worth it! The data from semi-official sources as I noted above is primarily because of the conflicting data because of primitive technology back then that likely missed quite a bit of data that we easily can get today with modern tornadoes. Plus, the authors were definitely big names in the tornado community, especially Fujita and Grazulis). Additionally as noted they’ve been incorporated into the newer pages for 1950s-1970s outbreaks lately too. MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 15:31, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, the F5s are bound to get "content fork" targeted as usual so I'll merge the ones not needing an article right now and expand on the others. Ones that definitely need articles are Guin & Tanner. EF520:04, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed all the Harv errors but came across a problem with I think all of the Grazulis refs...they're lacking page numbers. I do not have access to this source. One of you regulars or some WP weather geek who has access to the source should go through the article and find all the page numbers from the cited source. I think this article has a chance of at least being a GA but not with all the Grazulis pages basically missing... - Shearonink (talk) 13:27, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
