2011 joplin missouri tornado peer review

#2011 joplin missouri tornado peer review full#

“We are putting every available resource in place to help families and businesses cope with the aftermath of this devastating storm. “The entire state of Missouri stands with the people of Joplin,” said Governor Nixon. On Thursday, May 26, I joined Missouri Governor Jay Nixon for a tour of the tornado damage, followed by a community response meeting. At the direction of President Obama, who will visit Joplin over the Memorial Day weekend, USDA continues to help residents, farmers, ranchers and businesses. Over the past several weeks, in the wake of several disasters that have affected Missourians and others, USDA, FEMA and the entire federal family have been working with state and local officials to provide relief to those who need it most.

Scores remain missing or unaccounted for.

More than 120 people lost their lives and over 800 people were injured. It impacted hundreds of businesses and destroyed over 2,000 homes. The twister tore a path a mile wide and six miles long through the main part of town. I have never seen anything like it and hope to never again. Thanks for prompting me on that.The devastation in Joplin is unbelievable, heartbreaking and hard to describe. Image Done Actually I found a map with a satellite image of Joplin.I just deleted the Piccadilly Circus, retired couple home, paragraphs as they don't add much to the article, and are choppy.- intelati talk 03:30, 17 September 2011 (UTC) Reply.Jappalang ( talk) 06:14, 16 September 2011 (UTC) Reply While waiting for the official reports and perhaps a few 'look back' opinion pieces to be published, a copy-editing can be undertaken to make the article much more smooth in its language. Is this map pulled from the uploads because it has errors (if that is the case, then it should not be used here)? Other US Army Engineer diagrams still seem to be there. File:Joplin-tornado-map.jpg: Apparently, Kansas City has pulled this image from their flickr uploads.Wikipedia is not here to promote such activities or organizations. Why is there an inline link to at the end of the article? Why is this charity mentioned here? What differentiates it from other organizations that are trying to help recovery from natural disasters? If there are no secondary sources covering this charity's activity, there should be no mention.There is no need to provide a link farm unless the direct link provides something that is not in the article but can be further of use to the reader, do not include them. There are too many links in the See also and External links section.The flow is choppy and several times, the sentences do not flow to the next paragraph either because of jarring phrasings or non-sequitur contents. From that point on, skimpy paragraphs of one to three short sentences tend to dominate. I feel the reading quality of the article dives down after the first three paragraphs.These should be formatted to follow the rest (all should be using or the cite templates) with author, date and other relevant information filled in. There are several that simply states the domain of the website (e.g. Tidy up the references to a consistent standard.That said, there are some things that can be done to improve the article.

#2011 joplin missouri tornado peer review full#

Events surrounding the tornado may not have settled or reached their full conclusion yet. I agree with the sentiments that it would be better to wait for more reports. E) 21:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Reply Comments from Jappalang.It's not Storm Data, but information in this would be highly useful to the article. G) 01:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC) Reply Note: Here is the NWS Service Assessment.This is the official 'final' data on any given storm event and until it is released all information is considered preliminary. Thanks, intelati talk 00:41, 9 September 2011 (UTC) Reply I highly recommend this not be nominated for GA or higher until information has been published in Storm Data (or the NCDC Storm Events Database). This peer review discussion has been closed.Īccording to the first GA nomination, User:Wizardman Suggested that 'This can be re-nominated in about a month or so, whenever things seem to stabilize numbers-wise.' Although my lack of edits on this page, I am confident I can address any questions on the article.