Hey, I saw that you were a little surprised that a featured article was missing information. However, a lot of the tropical cyclone featured articles are more than a decade old, meaning that some sources weren't available or known when the article was written. You might've noticed that several FA's underwent an FARC because of missing information from journals or other reports, so it might be useful to link the congressional hearing on the talk page, rather than just adding a tag that info is missing. As a reminder, there's nothing in the FA criteria that says the article must have everything about a topic, just that "it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context". Of course, hurricane aftermath sections are often missing bits of information here and there on storm recovery, so at some point it becomes an academic discussion of whether "major facts" are missing or not. That being said, sometimes an article being featured means that people don't want to work on it, but just because it's featured doesn't mean it can't be changed! Cheers and hope you're having a good Labor Day. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh I know that! That tag mostly came from me discovering the missing information while working on Draft:Influence of severe weather on American politics. I’ve discovered that very few of the weather Wikipedia articles actually mention the political impacts they caused. Heck, the 1928 United States presidential election (another article I tagged along with Hurricane Hazel) does not even mention the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927, despite me finding several sources pointing towards the flood influencing the outcome of the election; which is why Draft:Influence of severe weather on American politics#1928 presidential election is a section.
- I got a whole lot of work to do still for the article. Out of the whole article so far, only the political impacts from Hurricane Andrew and Hurricane Ian are complete. Hurricane Katrina is still missing so much information. I was actually just mentioning on the Wikipedia discord how there is at least two weather disasters in the 21st century, fully without Wikipedia articles, where the U.S. Congress launched a formal investigation into. The 2006 Rockford flood (notice there is no article) had 20 local residents testify before Congress regarding failures in the government’s response.
- So it isn’t really shock on an FA missing information…but rather a shock on the large-scale information gap on weather-related articles. Just saying Hurricanehink, if you want to help out in any way…it would be greatly appreciated. Several hurricanes are missing their political-effects in their own articles…Hurricane Hazel is just one of several. If you are interested, but just don’t know which hurricanes, let me know and I can give you some hurricanes & sources to look into. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:36, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sure Hurricane Camille is going to turn up a lot! That's been my recent focus, combing through a ton of info. There were lots of federal responses to Camille, including strengthening FEMA, the NHC maintaining inland monitoring, and probably some other changes. As for the Rockford flood, I'm not even sure if it needs an article. Checking the NCDC report only says $20 million in damage, and no deaths, so I'm not even sure if it needs an article. Sometimes Congressional investigations take place to check out infrastructure failures, or to see what went wrong, and it seems like the failure to have a federal disaster declaration was one of the bigger issues here. Could be enough for an article, but it seems really minor compared to Katrina, Ian, Andrew, etc. Still, it might be able to support an article. I'm curious what the other weather event was that doesn't have an article but did have a formal investigation. You're right that a lot of storms and events are missing information though. But again, a lot of articles were written more than ten years ago, so the bigger surprise is that there are a few articles that are "done" (which have the political impacts thoroughly discussed) rather than how many articles need work. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:05, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh yeah, Camille will have probably several mentions. Draft:Influence of severe weather on American politics#Hurricane Camille is already started with basic information regarding the Senate Special Subcommittee on Disaster Relief investigation.
- The main sections of the article, so far, is Election Influence (i.e. influence on U.S. presidential elections, state elections, and local elections), Investigations (primarily U.S. Congress, although, a few other state/local-level investigations have occurred; such as the Texas Select Committees on Disaster Preparedness and Flooding for the July 2025 Central Texas floods), New legislation (federal and state legislation that was started (pass or failed) as a result of severe weather), Conspiracy theories and misinformation (given those have influenced politics since the 1940s in the U.S.), State of emergency declarations (planning to have a chart/list of every state of emergency declaration issued in the U.S. as a result of severe weather, since those give the federal or state government more authority, and finally Damage tours (political controversy over the years). I don't believe there is any other weather–politics-related topics besides those. So some topics, might be mentioned in multiple sections in the overall article.
- To answer your question, it was the 2007 Dumas tornado; specifically regarding FEMA's response.
- Hurricane Andrew was truly the only weather disaster with a complete / "done" political impacts summary prior to me starting this article. I completed Hurricane Ian and following a request from EF5, I finished off the last of the political impacts from the Greensburg tornado. But that is it. No other disaster (thus far) has a completed political impacts summary. Katrina's info is actually in three split articles (Political effects of Hurricane Katrina, Criticism of the government response to Hurricane Katrina, & the ultimate stub United States House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina). Technically, National Weather Service bulletin for Hurricane Katrina also contains political impacts, as the U.S. Congress investigated the NWS/NHC following Katrina, and this bulletin was directly discussed.
- This will be a very long, several-month (and hopefully dozens-of-editors)-long project. I'm trying to work backwards through time, so I am currently focusing on the impacts from Helene and Milton last year. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Once I get a better handle on Camille, I'll share the political/governmental impacts that I find. A lot of the "bigger" storms still need a lot of work - Katrina, Ian, most recent landfalling major hurricanes, and a lot of older landfalling major hurricanes - but thankfully someone got around to finishing Andrew. And it does sound like the Dumas tornado outbreak might be article worthy, but someone will hopefully eventually get around to it. Sometimes I get invested in working on list-like articles, but I usually end up preferring single storms until either finishing them or moving onto something else that needs work. You're probably starting to realize just how much work needs to be done across Wikipedia, and it's too much for any one person to consider taking on themselves. That's why it's important to keep the community spirit strong. I had the idea for a monthly project newsletter for all of the weather project. Maybe part of that could have people nominating collaborations, for either drafts or existing articles that need work, since I'd hate for you to have to do the influence of severe weather article alone, but it's also the sort of thing I don't really want to work on. It's such a broad topic that has potentially another two centuries of severe weather to be added. I'm not going to dissuade you, as I think you're on the right track with the article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:02, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you welcomed this IP. I want to let you know that is probably an IP sock of Andrew5. He lives in Delaware now and goes to college there. Just keep an eye out. wizzito | say hello! 05:12, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- What stood out to me was the large addition on a weather article by a new IP. Also, it geolocates to a Dunkin' Donuts. Andrew loves editing from Dunkin' free WiFi and multiple IPs connected to Dunkin' locations have been blocked because they were connected to his socking. wizzito | say hello! 05:13, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Gotcha! I welcome a lot of new accounts, especially from my watchlist as I am pet-peeved by red talk pages. I guess I overlooked that one…I must be losing my touch…I caught 1/3 of all the Andrew5 socks and I missed one. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 06:18, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
|
