Talk:Hurricane Ida

Proposed merge of Effects of Hurricane Ida in the Northeastern United States into Hurricane Ida

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was withdrawn. _ZZ^Z'S 01:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

---

Excluding the lead (obvious reasons) and the background (summary of the tropical cyclone up to this point), the size of this article is only 34,406 bytes. For comparison, if the appropriate sections for Louisiana in Hurricane Ida were merged, it would be 49,864 bytes, and it doesn't have its own article. Each subsection in the impacts section is smaller than the corresponding subsections in Hurricane Ida, which means the size of the main article likely duplicates most, if not all of the information in this article and would have little to no expansion.

TL;DR: Article size is small-medium and the information is very likely duplicate of the main article, which would barely expand it. _ZZ^Z'S 10:04, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

• Weak Oppose the content in the sub article is actually completely different then the main article if read correctly. If all of it were to be merged, it would push 8,000 words. I want to see how it would work out if it was fully merged, since again the content is NOT duplicative, before supporting. 107.122.189.21 (talk) 13:54, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

  After doing a little more research, I think it’s reasonable to say this article would fall in the 7,000-7,300 word range if the sub article is merged in, since again, most of the content is unique (the rainfall records, baseball game postponement, park closures and travel ban info is not in the main article), which is in line with SIZERULE, but would push it, and basically mean that we can’t expand the Ida article very much without having to spin it back out. 107.122.189.21 (talk) 20:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

• Neutral leaning support - you have to consider what a finished Ida article would look like. The preparations are clearly lacking. There isn't that much more info about the northeast that would be added, since that covers such a large area, and most of those areas are already mentioned here. If we run into the issue of size, I think Louisiana would be an appropriate sub-article in the future, given the damage there, and the much smaller scope. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

  I believe that we should split Louisiana as compensation due to the sheer size of the article. _ZZ^Z'S 14:06, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose – article size, and the article is quite good and lengthy. Beryl has a similar article for its effects in Texas. The Ida main article would be too big if this is to be merged.VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022 (talk) 17:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal to split Louisiana sections into a new article

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was withdrawn. _ZZ^Z'S 01:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

---

I believe the Preparations, Impact, and Aftermath sections for Louisiana should be split into a new article. The current size is creeping very close to 160k bytes. The specific sections I mentioned, when combined, are almost 50k bytes in size, which is more than the Northeastern article (about 42k bytes). Doing the math, the main article should reduce in size and maybe leave room for the Northeastern articles to be merged. Considering it significantly affected the state, it sounds reasonable to split the content into a new section. _ZZ^Z'S 17:40, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy pinging @Hurricanehink and VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022:, who voted in the merging of the other Ida article. If you support Louisiana, the most affected area by Ida, being split, then would you still support the Northeastern article for merging? _ZZ^Z'S 18:34, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I think Louisiana’s effects should also have an article

VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022 (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

If that is the case, would you support the Northeastern article being merged after the split is performed? _ZZ^Z'S 20:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

No, I think the Northeast effects should also have an article. VehicleandWeatherEnthusiast2022 (talk) 01:00, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

• Support. Yea, I agree that there is overlap for the Northeast US effects article, and that splitting Louisiana would make sure this article doesn't get too long. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Hurricane Ida (August 2021)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Hurricane Ida (August 2021) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 17 § Hurricane Ida (August 2021) until a consensus is reached. A1Cafel (talk) 05:25, 17 January 2025 (UTC)