Talk:January 2007 North American ice storm

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rename article[edit]

Portions of southern Canada (Toronto to Kingston) have been hit with ice some heavy amounts in heavily populated areas. So I suggest renaming the article to 2007 Midwest (or central) North America ice storm. Thank You!--132.213.54.19 22:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Texas has also been hit much harder than usual, and therefore your proposed name would not make much sense.--205.133.240.254 14:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantic crossover?[edit]

The system is now FOUR lows, ranging from 968 to 980 mbar, along with a hodgepodge of fronts. What are the chances that this could do the same in Europe? CrazyC83 12:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if this current warning from the BBC weather center (message posted at about 7:00PM EDT, may be changed later on) is the same then the super storm, but sound it is the same. [1]. So we will have to monitor the BBC site (maybe CNN) for the next couple of days

Also, I hope that media sources from the U.S will stop omitting fatalities from Canada, as there have been 3 so far (I will checked Canadian sources if there have been updates on that)--JForget 00:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to this article, that storm has killed 7 so far in Europe and created hurricane-like conditions and heavy snow (but not ice), resembling a European windstorm. It already has an article at Kyrill (storm) and I am wondering if they should be merged and calculated together as they were the same system. CrazyC83 23:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the North American storm was the one which has a pressure of 976 currently just south of Greenland and Iceland, but it could have been a wave that had detached from it and developped into Kyrill. I know that on the 15th the storm that slammed the midwest was over New England, while it passed over Newfoundland on the 16th. The article says it started off Newfoundland on the 15h, so not too sure it the two storms are really related132.213.54.36 23:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it is not clear whether they are from the same system, then keep as separate articles for now. Even if they are related, separate articles might be appropriate as the North American event was an ice storm, but the European event was a European windstorm. The emphasis in the North American event is on the ice and how the weight of that on trees and so on causes the problems. With the European event, it is more the high wind speeds, like a hurricane, that is causing the damage. Carcharoth 01:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need to take a look at the Ocean Prediction Center archives to make the judgement. CrazyC83 03:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hurricans and weather systems normally turn to south-east on the North Atlantic after crossing North America. Kyrill was strongly recreated by the temperature differences in the North Atlantic in this case. In other case former Hurricans can affect heavy damages by tracking through the Mediterranean Sea (track Vb and Vd of Extratropical cyclones in Europe).
Due to the recreation and the changed characteristics of the "new" Kyrill system, I would prefer not to merge the articles. The best way would be to mention the origin of Kyrill. Geo-Loge 08:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Even if they are two sides of the same phenomenon, I'd oppose merging the articles. The system had quite different characteristics on either sides of the Atlantic, and effects are probably going to be different for America than for Europe. Of course both articles should mention the relation between the events, but I definitely would like to see European windstorm Kyrill and 2007 North American ice strom as separate articles also in the future. Oghmoir 09:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'm removing the merge tags, as it seems clear that separate articles are needed. Carcharoth 10:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say a merge is inappropriate in any case. It looks like no single low pressure area can be traced between both storms continuously (the definition of continuity in this context), so these are disjoint events like Tropical Storm Tammy and the subsequent US Flooding - those events were very strongly related but are distinct. The ice storm and the wind storm may well be related, but are very distinct events.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's universal, so it's obviously global warming!!! --64.75.187.195 08:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Someone get some valid information that the storms are linked, make a section on the merged page about how they are linked (and of course cited and referenced), and rename the article to North Hemisphere Winter Storm of 2007 or something like that. toaster 17:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

California?[edit]

Cali is not in the midwest. Yes, its weather conditions are seen in the Midwest, but far worse; so the conditions in CA seems irrelevant to the topic. It should be excluded. toaster 17:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as it has nothing to do with the system that produced the ice storm. CrazyC83 23:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. It's this massive storm system that drew the cold air into the country. I think this should cover both the ice storm and the cold snap that followed it. bob rulz 04:20, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the latter, but still, the current conditions in California have nothing to do with the Midwest, but since the name change, it could now be included.toaster 17:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

we had snow in oregon last week —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.19.12.30 (talk • contribs)

I don't think that California was hit that hard. However, from what I've heard, the California orange crops were severely damaged. --Ixfd64 16:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

other waves of storms[edit]

Should we mention about a series of waves of freezing rain for the event, because there are still ice events across the southeast now and there will be more this weekend in Texas. Maybe we could the current and upcoming wave in one single article covering from the 12th to probably the 21st or 22nd and called the North American ice storm of 2007 as a series of ice storm events that affected the eastern half of the continent. --132.213.54.36 23:38, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That can be up for discussion, but it is definitely still ongoing - the stationary front that played a role is still there. (The actual low is in Europe now) CrazyC83 23:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've including fatalities from the current storm underway. I think that it will be the last storm to be included in this article. The one that seems predicted for the 25th will be totally unrelated.--JForget 02:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if everyone agrees, but I think as soon as the event currently underway in Newfoundland and Labrador ends, it will be the end of the coverage time of this article.--JForget 22:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was surprised that the two waves that preceded this one weren't mentioned. Colorado, Kansas, and Nebraska were hit by two storms before this one hit. They happened basically on Christmas and New Years. For Nebraska, both involved Ice Storms, the second one being by far the worst in the state's history. The ice storm in Nebraska didn't affect as wide an area as the one a week later that this article is mostly about, but it was WORSE than that one in terms of local impact. The one that was more widespread involved ice coatings of no more than about three quarters of an inch, from what I've read. Parts of Nebraska got a three to four inch coating from the New Year's Ice Storm. If Nebraska were as heavilly populated as eastern North America, the impact might have been comparable to the 1998 Ice Storm that hit Canada and the Northeast US. Toroca 04:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


References section[edit]

Something is wrong. I see HTML, people. --80.63.213.182 07:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should We Add =[edit]

I live in Missouri ad now it's snowing. It's at least 4-5 inches! I'm wondering if we should put a big snow storm came over the middleeast and dumped a lot of snow over Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Nebraska, and parts of Oklahoma? Tcatron565 15:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

whoa, awesome![edit]

I started this article and can't believe that it made the main page! --Ixfd64 16:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 85 deaths probably did it. It is the deadliest disaster of any kind in the US since Hurricane Rita (120), and the deadliest in North America since Hurricane Stan (1,600+), both in the fall of 2005. CrazyC83 16:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
uhm... its called hurricane Katrina buddy, nice one. toaster 23:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Those were after Katrina... CrazyC83 23:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Mexico?[edit]

Did the storm also have any impacts there? As it is written, it seems like it stopped at the Rio Grande Valley... CrazyC83 16:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Few areas in northern Mexico also got wintry precipitation including ice but it is hard to find details about the effects in Mexico.--JForget 22:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Washington? :\[edit]

I haven't taken the time to research this exactly, so this may be considered a different storm; however, Washington state was also hit by a series of storms in late December 06, early January 07. It began with a terrible wind storm that knocked out power to nearly 700,000 people. Three people died the first night - one woman drowned from flooding in her basement. I am certain the death toll was more than that, with car accidents and further flooding following. Parts of Washington state (most of Western Washington) were declared Disaster Areas and received Federal Aid from FEMA. The storm also brought with it a week of sustained heavy rain. As a result, flooding was experienced everywhere. Not a week passed before Seattle saw nearly 6 inches of snow starting at about 3PM and lasting into the evening. The snow storm blanketed the entire metropolitan area reaching from Bellingham in the north, south to Olympia. 3 days later, as most of the snow had turned into an inch of compact ice in non-plowed areas, we got 3 more inches of snow, and a brisk freeze that night. Temperatures remained below freezing for 2 days, and we got a small snow afterwards. Schools and several businesses (including my place of work) were closed for several days, some as many as 3 consecutive days and a minimum of 1 day a week from the beginning until last week. Roads have been clear for a week now, and the snow is all melted. Flooding still persists in some areas, and the FEMA disaster aid unit near my home has been removed.

I have great trouble believing that this storm that hit Western Washington, Oregon and Northern California and the storm discussed in this article are totally unrelated events. If so, I would suggest that the article's scope be widened to include the effects on other states (and provinces, I'm sure British Columbia had similar weather). Nuriko 12:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Totally unrelated climatic events. Sad mouse 16:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You all think youve got it so bad...[edit]

There is nothing about Saskatchewan, and the -50 (celcius) temperatures we were expierencing, or the 6 inches of snow.. clearly the worst weather in North America, but only 4 were killed. They tried to reach help when their had mechanical failures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 139.142.199.186 (talk) 14:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You can put details about the Saskatchewan chill in the U.S Western Freeze of 2007 article which IMO should be renamed to North American Freeze of 2007, considering that the Eastern half of the continent including Toronto, Ottawa, New York, Philadelphia and even the Carolinas will be in the deep freeze late this week.

The Canadian Prairies blizzard is mentionned in the winters storms of 2006-07 article, by the way and I have made a brief mention in this article too.--JForget 22:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recentism[edit]

I saw this today [2] and it reminded me to plug WP:RECENT on this page... this article should include a section on how winter storms are traditionally blown out of proportion by the media... see also: North American blizzard of 1996 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MPS (talk • contribs) 20:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Bot report : Found duplicate references ![edit]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "cnn-01-13" :
    • http://www.cnn.com/2007/WEATHER/01/13/ice.storm.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest
    • http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070117/ap_on_re_us/winter_blast

DumZiBoT (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on January 2007 North American Ice Storm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on January 2007 North American Ice Storm. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:46, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on January 2007 North American Ice Storm. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on January 2007 North American Ice Storm. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:24, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:January_2007_North_American_ice_storm&oldid=1205750550"