Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2010 Yazoo City tornado/archive2

11WB

750h

Will do a prose review (non-experienced). 750h+ 08:28, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

lead

• restrengthening to low-end EF4 intensity few miles southwest of ==> "restrengthening to low-end EF4 intensity a few miles southwest of"
• Initially, there were uncertainties on whether this ==> "Initially, there were uncertainties about whether this"
• concluded with one, unified track. ==> "concluded that there was one, unified track."
• track became the fourth longest in Mississippi history ==> "track became the fourth-longest in Mississippi history"
• with maximum width of 3,080 yd ==> "with a maximum width of 3,080 yd"
• devastated areas few days later ==> "devastated areas a few days later"
• organizations, local businesses and non-profit groups oxford comma consistency
• Louisiana and a Baptist church in Yazoo City that were completely ==> "Louisiana and a Baptist church in Yazoo City that was completely"

meteorological summary

• On April 20, Storm Prediction Center highlighted a Day 5 ==> "On April 20, the Storm Prediction Center highlighted a Day 5"
• destabilizing airmass combined with strong wind field ==> "destabilizing airmass combined with a strong wind field"
• spreading across the region suggesting severe weather add a comma after "region"
• Development of severe thunderstorms were occurring during ==> "Development of severe thunderstorms was occurring during"
• leading to concentrated area of severe weather across the moderate ==> "leading to a concentrated area of severe weather across the moderate"
• convective clusters and line of embedded supercells this should be either "convective clusters and a line of embedded supercells" or "convective clusters and lines of embedded supercells"
• in place for large portions Mississippi and Alabama and small parts ==> "in place for large portions of Mississippi and Alabama and small parts"
• with the storms expected to moving into Alabama ==> "with the storms expected to move into Alabama"
• Large scale ascent was forecasted to ==> "Large-scale ascent was forecasted to"
• and a moist and unstable boundary layer was expected ==> "and a moist and unstable boundary layer were expected"
• the afternoon as discrete supercells development ==> "the afternoon as discrete supercell development"
• with wind gust up to ==> "with wind gusts up to"

More incoming. 750h+ 13:37, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Lead:

• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done Added the extra commas
• Done

Meteorological Summary:

• Done
• Done
• Done Added the comma
• Done
• Done
• Done Went with the latter statement
• Done
• Done Removed moving with move
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done

GrenadinesDes (talk) 14:16, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

@750h+ also complementary ping GrenadinesDes (talk) 11:47, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

tornado summary

• carving cycloidal marks on the ground ==> "carving cycloidal marks in the ground"
• intensified to mid-range EF3 strength crossing Willow Bayou Road ==> "intensified to mid-range EF3 strength, crossing Willow Bayou Road"
• Couple of framed homes sustained ==> "A couple of framed homes sustained"
• where approximately 14 employees were working at the time the tornado struck, all the employees survived, though three received minor injuries. ==> "where approximately 14 employees were working at the time the tornado struck. All the employees survived, though three received minor injuries."
• Every warehouse, the electrical infrastructure of the plant, and the office areas on site were destroyed, the piping system sustained severe damage and communications went offline. ==> "Every warehouse, the electrical infrastructure of the plant, and the office areas on site were destroyed. The piping system sustained severe damage and communications went offline."
• The tornado briefly entering back into Louisiana ==> "The tornado briefly entered back into Louisiana"
• before re-entering back into Mississippi ==> "before re-entering Mississippi"
• uprooting a large amount of trees in the ==> "uprooting a large number of trees in the"
• Road sustained significant roof damage and a utility add a comma after "damage"
• snapping multiple trees along Yazoo River ==> "snapping multiple trees along the Yazoo River"
• with estimated windspeeds up to 120 "windspeeds" is usually two separate words
• a couple of outbuilding were demolished ==> "a couple of outbuildings were demolished"
• a framed home had most of their roof ripped away ==> "a framed home had most of its roof ripped away"
• sustained moderate roof damage and a single-wide mobile comma after "damage" (consistency)
• Along Bus Station Road, The Hillcrest Baptist Church was "The" should be lowercase
• Several hardwood trees nearby the church ==> "Several hardwood trees near the church"
• Mississippi Department Of Transportation maintenance building "Of" should be lowercase
• leveling a poorly built home at estimated windspeeds of 155 mph "windspeeds" ==> "wind speeds"
• The tornado slightly weakened to mid-range EF3 intensity, crossing Old Benton Road, leveling a poorly built home at estimated windspeeds of 155 mph (249 km/h), another home along the road was mostly leveled, with a few interior walls left standing. Separate the sentence (starting at "another home along the road was mostly leveled")
• a double-wide mobile was destroyed ==> "a double-wide mobile home was destroyed"
• At 12:24 p.m., National Weather Service issued ==> "At 12:24 p.m., the National Weather Service issued"
• For the rest of Yazoo County; more semi-colon should be a comma
• A well-built brick home was mostly leveled, leaving a few walls left standing. ==> "A well-built brick home was mostly leveled, with a few walls left standing."
• weakening back to an low-end EF2 intensity "an" ==> "a"
• and parts of Holmes, Choctaw, Montgomery and Carroll County oxford comma
• Carroll County with the tornado's forward speed estimated at 55 mph (89 km/h) Comma after "County"
• several trees, demolishing outbuilding ==> "several trees, demolishing an outbuilding"
• went through rural forested area at ==> "went through a rural forested area at"
• after crossing Natchez Trace Parkway ==> "after crossing the Natchez Trace Parkway"
• walls collapse, multiple of homes had significant roof damage "multiple of homes" ==> "multiple homes"
• Dozens of mobile homes and conventional foundation homes were completely demolished and multiple vehicles were thrown into the tree line, two poorly-built homes were leveled, a couple of one-story homes were mostly leveled, with a few interior walls left standing, a poorly-constructed home was shifted off its foundation, and several hardwood and softwood trees were significantly snapped or debarked. this sentence is quite a mouthful, could be split into two or even three.
• The tornado make an eastward turn ==> "The tornado made an eastward turn"
• The tornado dissipated few miles north ==> "The tornado dissipated a few miles north"

case studies

• The estimated timber damage inflicted from the ==> "The estimated timber damage inflicted by the"
• Portion of every tornadoes recorded have TKE ==> "A portion of every tornado recorded has TKE}}
• The study noted that a tornado's were measured by energy a tornado's what?
• with the longer lasting tornadoes ==> "with the longer-lasting tornadoes"

Will continue.

Tornado summary:

• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done Removed run-on
• Done Removed run-on
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done added the comma
• Done added "the"
• Done Split up windspeeds
• Done
• Done
• Done added comma
• Done lowercased "The"
• Done
• Done lowercased "Of"
• Done Split up windspeeds
• Done Removed run-on
• Done added the "home"
• Done added "the"
• Done replaced semi-colon
• Done Replaced sentence
• Done Replaced "an"
• Done added the commas
• Done Added "an"
• Done added "a"
• Done added "the"
• Done split up into 2 paragraphs
• Done
• Done

Case studies:

• Done
• Done
• Done added "strength"
• Done added the dash

GrenadinesDes (talk) 15:58, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

impacts and aftermath

• The tornado caused $36 million in total damage, $35 million in property and $1 million in agricultural damage in Louisiana and injured 16 people.[16] needs an oxford comma. also is the "injured 16 people" part not a bit random.
• more than 160 homes received moderate to major damage, with 107 homes destroyed ==> "more than 160 homes sustained moderate to major damage, and 107 were destroyed"
• affected 556 homes, 242 manufactured homes, 33 businesses and 18 agricultural areas oxford comma
• with a couple of them from Yazoo City were airlifted to the hospital
• with a couple of them from Yazoo City were airlifted to the hospital, with 14 of the patients being in critical condition. ==> "with a couple of them from Yazoo City, who were airlifted to the hospital; 14 of the patients were in critical condition."
• Nationwide spokeswomen reported that 35 claims were placed by Monday and she add a comma following "Monday"
• not planning on adding temporary claims center in add "a" after "adding"
• Electric Power Association reported 18,000 ==> "The Electric Power Association reported 18,000"
• Eagle Bend might have not heard ==> "Eagle Bend might not have heard"
• Despite that, the residents of Eagle Bend might have not heard the sirens regardless since the closest one to the town was 4 miles (6.4 km) away since Warren county lacked the money available to construct a tornado siren near the Eagle Bend area. this sentence could be split into two
• from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published ==> "from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published"

response

• have been higher, if not for the comma not needed
• Tuesday, April 27 to Friday, April 30 during the ==> "Tuesday, April 27, to Friday, April 30, during the"
• Choctaw, Holmes, Warren and Yazoo Counties oxford comma
• The declaration also noted that FEMA were continuing ==> "The declaration also noted that FEMA was continuing"
• additional forms of assistance to be likely after ==> "additional forms of assistance would likely be provided"
• surveying completed ==> "surveying was completed"
• according to American Medical ==> "according to an American Medical"
• Central Mississippi chapter opened ==> "The Central Mississippi chapter opened"
• Service collaborated to organized a stress ==> "Service collaborated to organize a stress"
• all the disaster declared counties ==> "all the disaster-declared counties"
• deployed in Holmes County, 278 volunteers were registered ==> "deployed in Holmes County, and 278 volunteers were registered"
• assisting in accounting all residents in ==> "assisting in accounting for all residents in"
• including Arkansas and Kentucky arrived to aid in the recovery effort need a comma after "Kentucky"
• The foundation made emergency ==> "The foundation provided emergency"
• span of a couple days ==> "span of a couple of days"
• Houston Astros player, Roy Oswalt, traveled commas aren't needed here
• started working relief effort ==> "started a relief effort"
• from his parents and neighbors homes. ==> "from his parents' and neighbors' homes."
• roofing shingles, windows and pipes oxford comma
• guests that showed up ==> "guests who showed up"

recovery

• a new electrical system, a large steel enclosure to protect the distillation and oil blending units ==> "a new electrical system, and a large steel enclosure to protect the distillation and oil blending units"
• housing, a disaster recovery ==> "housing, and a disaster recovery"
• to assist with unemployment and small business "business" should be "businesses"
• almost 69.1 million tons of debris was removed ==> "almost 69.1 million tons of debris were removed"
• Emergency management director for Choctaw ==> "The emergency management director for Choctaw"
• with many other moving into FEMA cottage homes ==> "with many others moving into FEMA cottage homes"
• based in the St. Louis spent "the" shouldn't be here
• was rebuilt debt free due to ==> "was rebuilt debt-free due to"
• agencies extinguishing the fires in 14 hours why is this "fires" when there's only one mentioned
• storm chaser and meteorologist, Reed Timmer, and his chase commas shouldn't be here.
• chase partners Joel Taylor and Chris Chittick, were ==> "chase partners, Joel Taylor and Chris Chittick, were"

later tornadoes

• with estimated windspeeds of 115 mph "windspeeds" ==> "wind speeds"
• power poles were snapped ==> "snapped power poles"
• No casualties were reported and the tornado caused ==> "No casualties were reported, and the tornado caused"
• intensifying to high-end EF1 strength, demolishing multiple farm outbuildings ==> "intensifying to high-end EF1 strength, and demolishing multiple farm outbuildings"
• damaged and moderate roof damage oxford comma
• moderate roof damage were noted before ==> "moderate roof damage was noted before"
• No casualties were reported and the tornado caused $500,000 in damage ==> "No casualties were reported, and the tornado caused $500,000 in damage"

Impacts and Aftermath

• Done added the oxford comma, and the mention of 16 injuries is the only sort of human impact the tornado did in Louisiana.
• Done reworded sentence
• Done entered the comma
• Done redone statement
• Done added the comma after Monday
• Done added "a"
• Done added "the"
• Done reworded and split up the sentence.
• Done added "the"

response

• Done comma removed
• Done added comma
• Done added comma
• Done replaced "were"
• Done reworded sentence
• Done added "was"
• Done
• Done Added "the"
• Done
• Done added the dash

GrenadinesDes (talk) 18:27, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Continuation:

• Done added "and"
• Done added "for"
• Done added comma after Kentucky
• Done replaced word
• Done added "of"
• Done removed commas
• Done replaced "working"
• Done
• Done
• Done

recovery

• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done changed to "fire"
• Done
• Done

later tornadoes

• Done
• Done synthaxes
• Done added the commas for statements similar to that
• Done added ", and"
• Done added comma
• Done replaced were to was

GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

@750h+ GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Just a note. Per WP:FAC instructions, we are advised not to use "graphics or complex templates on FAC nomination pages", as they increase page load time. 11WB (talk) 02:54, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

oh I didn't know mb GrenadinesDes (talk) 08:00, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

I think just with the sheer number of grammatical issues I've pointed out (I think i've point the majority out above), I'll give this article, like 11WB, a tentative support too. 750h+ 07:33, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

@GrenadinesDes, what is the relevance of 2010 Yazoo City tornado#Later tornadoes. This feels like a WP:COATRACK added on to the end of a finished article. 11WB (talk) 15:12, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:OFFTOPIC is the more relevant essay for this. 11WB (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

I felt like adding there since Yazoo City has been struck other times afterwards. I assume it was alright since Greensburg tornado had something similar, not trying to make an XYZ argument but. GrenadinesDes (talk) 15:56, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

@11WBif its too problematic I'll remove it GrenadinesDes (talk) 18:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Up to you, if it has a reason for inclusion it should stay. If not, then it becomes a COATRACK. 11WB (talk) 18:35, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Ill remove the 2021 tornado, 2010 is a bit more relevant since it occurred relatively soon after the main EF4 GrenadinesDes (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

@11WB Is this satisfactory? GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:05, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Been quite busy recently, apologies. I've given support already, so anything after is optional. 11WB (talk) 15:26, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Aviationwikiflight

Placeholder, will review later. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 06:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@Aviationwikiflight ? GrenadinesDes (talk) 14:13, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

@Aviationwikiflight um GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:37, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the lack of comments. I've been busier as of late which makes it that I have less time to review this article (and only have time for smaller edits). For the mean time, I recommend posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Severe weather (and maybe asking other users if they're willing to review) to increase the visibility of this FAC. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 16:27, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Seconding the above. This is excellent advice. 11WB (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Hurricanehink

Oppose. I noticed the FAC and wanted to give a few comments. Some are minor, some are about the writing, and having recently spent so much time on Hurricane Camille, I just feel certain parts fall short as a weather article.

• Given that most of the article uses mph or km/h, how come so much of the met setup has knots?
• Why is the forest/tree damage under "Case studies" instead of Mississippi?
• Somewhere, you need to indicate that all times are in Central Daylight Time, since there are multiple exact times mentioned.
• Many parts of the meteorological setup is excessively wordy, or heavy on jargon without explaining what the terms mean. Examples:

• "On April 20, the Storm Prediction Center highlighted a Day 5 risk for the lower Mississippi River basin region for April 24, with an environment that corresponds with the Day 4 risk forecasted for April 23; a favorable kinematic and thermodynamic environment possibly near or ahead of an advancing front." - The opening has five different date references, including three exact dates. This is wordy, and complex, and it's the first thing that readers will read after the intro section. Also, the ending part is grammatically incorrect; since it's followed by a semicolon, it should function as a complete sentence on its own.
• "boundary layer" - IDK what this is
• "hatched risk" - is it a chicken? This happens twice.
• "Multiple rounds of convective activities and storm mode were expected" - "storm mode" sounds like an energy drink.
• "Discrete, cyclic supercells were expected over the high risk zone, with convective clusters and lines of embedded supercells also being a possibility. " - again, it would be better to say when the supercells formed, which the section appears to do in the fifth paragraph. This just feels like a paragraph summary of a single weather forecast.
• "Forecast soundings over the high risk area, depicts" - why present tense? And what is a forecast sounding?
• "with the surface low tracking northward from Arkansas to St. Louis as it undergoes significant deepening" - again, why present tense? And I believe this should link to low pressure area, but correct me if I'm wrong.
• "become elevated overtime" - I'm not familiar with this kind of terminology. Did you mean "over time"? Also unclear what "become elevated" means.
• "Large-scale ascent was forecasted to continue downstream of the upper-level storm system, though there was still some uncertainty on where more storms will develop, with the expectations for it to be over the destabilizing warm sector spanning the lower Mississippi valley and spreading across central to southern Mississippi, eastern Louisiana, and southern Alabama. " - too much and too confusing
• "The area most favorable for significant tornado possibilities were expected over central and northern Mississippi, though favorable low-level wind shear and a moist and unstable boundary layer were expected to maintain the possibilities of strong tornadoes across southern Mississippi, Alabama, and eastern Louisiana through the afternoon as discrete supercell development was expected to begin ahead of the developing quasi-linear convective system (QLCS)." - ditto

• "was forecasted" - "was forecast"
• "to slowly move" - split infinitive
• "Low-level and deep layer shear was forecasted to support tornadic supercells, with surface dewpoints expected to be up to mid-60s to low-70s" - given that the article was in the past, the predictions here aren't that useful. The "was forecasted" and "expected" should instead be what the actual shear and dewpoints were. The met setup should be cited to a retroactive report, not almost solely cited to the forecasts from before the event. Are there any reports published after the fact that report these datapoints?
• "At 10:28 a.m., a couple of large thunderstorms began demonstrating supercell characteristics, with the storms expected to move into Alabama throughout the late morning hours, with dew points reaching the upper 60s." - this is probably the most important part of the met setup, since it's finally the system that generated the tornado. You should say where they formed, rather than saying the forecast (the article feels like it's written as the tornado was active).

This is only through the met setup, and I see a significant number of issues. While I appreciate the work that's been put into the article so far, I don't believe it passes the FA criteria, and it needs a fair amount of work in my opinion. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:58, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

• Replaced all the knots with mph (km/h)
• Moved the timber tree damage analysis

(will fix more later @Hurricanehink) GrenadinesDes (talk) 13:47, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Added all the CDTs to the times that don't mention that.

• Again, I think a note saying that all times are in CDT would be useful, to indicate the article's time throughout. The first sentence starting with "During the morning to early afternoon hours" shows why that's needed. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Added a note GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:33, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• It's like that to clarify which Day is forecasted, like April 23rd is the Day 4 outlook and April 24th (the main day of interest) is Day 5, in order to confuse the readers. Though I did split off the sentence after the semicolon into its own. I know this is confusing considering you're more into tropical cyclones than tornadoes

• The confusing part has nothing to do with TC's. In fact, there's a very similar parallel, with the National Hurricane Center issuing five day outlooks for potential tropical cyclone development. Rather than having several mentions of dates in the same sentence, the proper way is to write it in a less confusing way than having five different time mentions. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I removed the Day 4 part, does that make the sentence less confusing @Hurricanehink GrenadinesDes (talk) 19:48, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

It's better, but I wonder if the April 24 is needed, since that's implied. Also, I realize that you never even identify what the Storm Prediction Center is. The "highlighted a Day 5 risk" sounds like it's written by someone very familiar with the terminology, but that's the sort of jargon that could be avoided with rewording. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

reworded the sentence GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

You can probably cut the "severe", and maybe change "center" to "agency" since SPC has "center" in the name? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Done GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• Boundary Layer is an area of moist air that pushes into a region that pushes the warm, dry air into the atmosphere, which causes convective initiation of thunderstorms.

• I don't think merely linking boundary layer is all that helpful then, when that first sentence starts with "In physics and fluid mechanics, a boundary layer is the thin layer of fluid in the immediate vicinity of a bounding surface formed by the fluid flowing along the surface." Again, the jargon in the article is an issue. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Adding the explaniation GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:18, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Which made the sentence even longer and more complex. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

"While large hail and damaging winds was expected, a moist boundary layer, which is an area of moist air moving into an area, and strong wind shear indicated potential tornadic activities" - it has "moist" twice. I don't think people would like that given their aversion to the word. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Removed the first "moist", but I don't see how the explanation makes it more "complex", you never really explained that. GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

The sentence structure is complex and difficult to follow. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• A hatched risk is an area that has an enhanced chance of seeing significant (EF2+) tornadoes or severe wind or larger hail.

• Explaining it to me here doesn't help any future readers who also might not be familiar with the term. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Added the explanation GrenadinesDes (talk) 19:52, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Again, by adding the explanation, it makes the sentence even longer and more complex. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

What do you want me to do then, you told me I should add the explanation, but now you're telling me it makes the sentence more complex and longer. GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I want you to explain it in a way that's not too complex. It could be split over multiple sentences. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Redid the explanation of hatched risk, its shorter and less complex GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• Storm mode is what type of storms will be on a certain event, like discrete supercells have a chance of producing significant tornadoes. A linear storm mode favors winds more than tornadoes, and so on.

• Great, explain that in the article. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Added the explaination GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:04, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Same problem as elsewhere. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Removed GrenadinesDes (talk) 18:17, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• Clarified the timing, its an overall summary of the Day 1 outlook.
• Changed depicts > depicted. Forecast Soundings are what SPC uses to determine what the environment is for an area and, to an extent, the risk as a whole.

• Great, explain that. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Added the explanation GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:04, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Linked the LPA. I assume "undergoes" is the issue so its now "underwent"
• When a storm becomes elevated, that means they're no longer surface based and have lower chances of producing any sort of tornadic activities and are more mainly wind/hail.

• Great, explain that. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Added the explanation GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:06, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• I don't really know what you want me to do here, this is my own wording on what SPC forecasted that day, and I hope I don't sound too rude, but it seems like most of the issues you've pointed out is just the lack of understanding of tornado terminology considering you're more familiar with tropical cyclone terminology.

• It's not a lack of understanding of tornado terminology. A good tornado article would be able to explain all of the terms, and anyone should be able to understand them without having an extensive background in the field. I wish you would have replied to my individual comments instead of listing it at the end, as I'm not sure exactly what comment you're referring to. If it's the part I think it is ("Low-level and deep layer..."), then my issue is using a report from before the event and relying so much on "expected" and "forecast". The paragraph already mentioned the wind shear, and then the next paragraph gets more exact about the dewpoints. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

If there's too much of an overreliance on pre event forecasting, then I'll start cutting them down GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:28, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink I think the problem is mostly fixed. The first paragraph that most of the pre-event forecasting have been reduced and any mentions of things like dew points were regulated to the paragraph that actually is during the event (paragraph 5) GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Here are some additional areas that need work, with regards to too much information:

• "A strengthening upper-level storm system traversed across Texas to the southern Great Lakes region, with an accompanying cold front advancing easterly from the central southern Mississippi River Valley into the Ohio River Valley. The system stretched into the central southern portion of the United States. Ahead of the cold front was a warm and unstable air mass extending from the lower to middle Mississippi River Valley and northern Gulf Coast States into the Ohio River Valley. " - this is 76 words that I'm pretty sure says the same thing multiple times, like Ohio River and Mississippi River valleys. Also, isn't the central southern portion of the US the Mississippi River valley?

• Fixed and cut down alot of the paragraph GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• But now the sentence has two "with..." clauses. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Removed the second "with" and reworded the sentence associated with that word. GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:05, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  And the sentence is still 46 words, and too complex of a sentence to be useful. Can you simplify it further? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Simplified again GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:46, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

  The grammar is still poor in the sentence. The last part ("a warm and moist environment was ahead of the front") should either be after a semicolon, or change the phrasing so the subject/verb works for the entire sentence. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• "Large-scale ascent was forecast to continue downstream of the upper-level storm system, though there was still some uncertainty on where more storms will develop, with the expectations for it to be over the destabilizing warm sector spanning the lower Mississippi valley and spreading across central to southern Mississippi, eastern Louisiana, and southern Alabama. The area most favorable for significant tornado possibilities were expected over central and northern Mississippi, with favorable low-level wind shear and a moist and unstable boundary layer maintaining the possibilities of strong tornadoes across southern Mississippi, Alabama, and eastern Louisiana throughout the afternoon as discrete supercell development was expected ahead of the developing quasi-linear convective system (QLCS)." - I feel like this had been established multiple times at this point that tornadoes were likely over Mississippi. This is 110 words saying a lot of the same thing that was said before, other than the new term QLCS

• Cutting it down GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

  It still talks a lot about the expectations, even though thunderstorms had already formed at this point. It's a 42 word sentence that says both a lot and a little at the same time. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Reduce the amount of times talks about. Also you keep saying "it talks about alot and little at the same time" but never point out what information is possibly missing or overexplained. GrenadinesDes (talk) 21:43, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Almost my entire review has had a recurring theme of the same issues. Here's the full sentence now:

  "Large-scale ascent was to continue downstream, though there was still some uncertainty on where storms will develop, with the expectations for it to be over the destabilizing warm sector spanning the lower Mississippi valley and spreading across to areas in southern Alabama." So first off, it's a very long sentence, but very little is actually said here, mostly just the expectations/uncertainty. At the same time, you casually mention "warm sector" for the second time in the article, as if everyone knows what a warm sector is. Also, Alabama is mentioned four different times in the met setup, but the article is focused on a tornado in Mississippi. So the Alabama portion is an example that's needlessly overexplained. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  There are still some uncertainites mentioned because this was a morning mesoscale discussion, where while the event was starting, there was still some iffyness on how things would evolve. And to be honest, I feel like it's important to bring up how there were still some uncertainties even when the event began. Though I will reduce the amount of Alabama mentioned and I added an explanation for warm sector GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:35, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

  Why do you feel like it's important to bring up the uncertainties when the event began? Did it affect the warnings at all? Also, "though there was still some uncertainty on where storms will develop" - grammar. "Will" sounds like it's the article was written while the event was happening. Predictions/uncertainties are only useful if they provide context to the overall event. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• " Forecast soundings, an observation used to decipher the environment of an area, over the high risk area depicted a 60–70 mph (97–113 km/h) low-level jet supporting large hodographs and storm relative helicity of 300-600 joules per kilogram (j/kg), and mid-level convective available potential energy of 1500—2500 j/kg, with winds of 125–160 mph (201–257 km/h) at 250 mbar (7.382 inHg) and 70–105 mph (113–169 km/h) at 500 mbar (15 inHg)." - this is a 75 word list. Also, I just noticed, what is a hodographs? And what are the mbar that you mention twice?

• Added the explanations, and the mbars are how far off it is in the atmosphere, 850mbar is closer to the surface. GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Ill remove it then GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:36, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

This sentence is now 57 words, and is difficult to understand even with the explanations. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• "with dew points reaching the upper 60s" - metric conversion?

• I have no idea how you could make a metric conversion from upper 60s, especially since SPC didn't specify, so I'll just 60-69F to C. GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Convert#Round_to_a_multiple_of_5:_15,_20,_25,_... ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• Changed up the paragraph a little.
• Changed the "was forecasted" to "was forecast"
• Fixed up the infinitive.
• The SPC is really the only reliable source I could use for met sections on tornadoes, and I'm using the past outlooks to showcase how the forecasting for this event played out and the predictions that were expected.

• It's not the only source for met data though. NCDC mentions similar information (wind shear, humidity). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Clarified the location.

Overall, to be completely honest with the met sections, there's not that much issues with it really. As I pointed out, it seems like most of the issues stems from little understanding of what certain tornado terminologies are, and comparing this section to your work on Hurricane Camille may not be a good idea since Hurricanes and Tornadoes are very obviously different in terms of their setups. There are some valid points you pointed out, but I don't exactly know how you want me to dumb down some of the paragraphs. GrenadinesDes (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

The problem with jargon is that you need to make the article accessible to the average reader. I learned that with hurricane articles, and I'm noticing it a lot here. The met section probably has too much information to be useful (especially the forecasts), so it's overwhelming, rather than being informative. But at the same time as the article having a lot of info, some things are missing. I notice that the (Enhanced) Fujita scale is only mentioned once in the entire article, in the infobox. I have opposed an FAC before over the same issue, not mentioning the (Enhanced) Fujita scale in the body of the article, which means all of the EF3/4 references have no description. It would be like if a hurricane article mentioned Category 5 without mentioning the Saffir-Simpson scale, which has happened before. The only hint of how the tornado's intensity was even estimated was "...the surveying team of the National Weather Service office at Jackson, Mississippi, preliminarily rated the tornado high-end EF3." Some readers might not know that tornado intensity is only determined after the fact, based on damage, but the article doesn't reflect that. I noticed a few other issues (unit conversion and grammar), but none were as major an issue as jargon/accessibility. I'm worried you might be too used to tornado terminologies, when it comes to the public's general understanding of them. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Added more clarification that the tornado's rating is based off the EF scale GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:39, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

A lot of the additions made the writing even more complex and difficult to follow. I'm sorry, I can tell you put a lot of work into the article, but even in that opening section, there are a lot of issues. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

"A lot of the additions made the writing even more complex and difficult to follow." Then why tell me to add the explanation then. This whole thing is frustrating and it's needlessly stressing me out. GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:31, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink More fixes were made, including some that could've been potentially brought up, but I still don't really know whether or not the explanations should be removed GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:46, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

There were two problems with the article, that some parts weren't explained well enough, and some sentences were too long and complicated. Both can be true at the same time. Apologies that this is frustrating, but I have high standards for featured weather articles. I'll continue my review.

• I tried cutting down the explanations to atleast make it seem less complicated and still delivers the message GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:07, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Tornado summary

• "The tornado quickly intensified to low-end EF3 intensity, downing a couple of high-tension power poles along I-20, carving cycloidal marks in the ground, and flipping a tractor trailer, injuring the driver." - there are five verbs here. I put it through a grammar detector, and it said the sentence was quite advanced, at a post-graduate level. The fact it intensified to low-end EF3 intensity is one thing, but then we adjust to it hitting an interstate. Considering this is the only mention of I-20 in the article, there should be some kind of mention that this is a significant roadway. Right now it just says "along I-20" without saying what it is. This is another example where the sentence is complex, while at the same time missing some contextual info.
• " The tornado crossed Willow Bayou Road at low-end EF3 intensity, snapping an electrical transmission tower, a mobile home was destroyed, several homes experienced complete loss of their exterior walls, a home was completely unroofed, and several trees were snapped or uprooted." - again, too much for one sentence.
• "At 11:21 a.m. CDT, the National Weather Service issued a PDS tornado warning for the rest of Madison and Carroll parishes and counties in Mississippi, with storm spotters confirming a large tornado had impacted an industrial plant, with the tornado moving at 55 mph (89 km/h)." - considering the previous 98 words were about the tornado hitting the industrial plant, it seems very odd to say "had impacted an industrial plant". It just feels like an afterthought.
• Similar for the image, where the caption says "An Industrial Plant near the community of Omega was destroyed by the tornado." Was this the Complex Chemical Company plant?
• "Several trees were snapped, two mobile homes were dislodged from their units and were rolled, a framed home had most of its roof ripped away, a couple of homes sustained moderate roof damage, and a single-wide mobile home was destroyed." - that's on the long side.
• " intensifying to high-end EF2 strength"... "weakened to mid-range EF2 intensity" - you never even established what EF2 intensity was, let alone high end or mid range. It's one thing having the change from EF3 to EF2, but it seems excessive to specify the weakening/strengthening so many times, and this time stood out to me because it was the same intensity.
• " at estimated wind speeds of 155 mph (249 km/h)." - should be rounded
• "A pool house storage shed" - not sure what this means, and I can't access the source
• "The tornado traversed through forested areas, inflicting intense forestry damage." - can you avoid saying "forested/forestry", maybe get a synonym for one of them?
• " The tornado crossed Powell Road at high-end EF2 intensity, destroying a double-wide mobile home, significantly snapping several trees, and a home along Fouche Pit Road sustained significant roof damage." - few things here. What's the significance of the double-wide mobile homes? Also, the grammar is bad.
• "For the rest of Yazoo County, more prolific tree damage occurred, with several of them snapping, mobile homes were demolished," - the mobile home part comes out of nowhere compared to the beginning of the sentence
• Considering the article is called the "Yazoo City" tornado, it's a rather glaring omission that the summary never mentioned when it entered/affected Yazoo City.

That's my review through Yazoo County. The more I'm reading, the more I think the article needs a lot of work. Again, sorry that it's frustrating. The review process can be that way. But check out the Greensburg tornado, which underwent four FAC's before it finally passed on its fifth attempt. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 04:41, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• I don't know how exactly to show that I-20 is a significant roadway, I hope what I added is good enough.

• You didn't need the "major". The problem was that you had "I-20" without indicating what that meant. Now you have "interstate I-20", which is also wrong. It's "Interstate 20". And since you don't use I-20 again, you don't even need to abbreviate it. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Unabbreviated I-20 GrenadinesDes (talk) 21:30, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• Split off the sentence after "electrical transmission tower".
• Reworded the sentence
• Yes that's the Complex plant, I'll add clarification.
• Reworded and split the sentence into two.
• Removed the "weakened to mid-range EF2 intensity" and reworded the sentence associated with it.
• How can I round up the km/h estimate if it's a metric conversion machine I can't really control? I assume I get rid of the metric conversion.

• I was hoping that when I brought it up before, you'd check if that applied to elsewhere in the article, which still has "estimated windspeeds of 155 mph (249 km/h)." ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

The metric conversion works and both time "155 mph" was used, it goes up to 249 km/h instead of 250, again, I don't know how to round it up GrenadinesDes (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• https://apps.dat.noaa.gov/StormDamage/DamageViewer/ set date to 4/24/2010 - 4/24/2010, and go to one of the EF2 DIs north of Old Benton road.

• Again as I said before, "I wish you would have replied to my individual comments instead of listing it at the end, as I'm not sure exactly what comment you're referring to. " If this is about "pool house storage shed", then I still don't know what it means. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Well that's how the surveyors described it, and it seems like they were confused on what the structure was, but it looks more like a home than a storage shed + it was rated under FR12 residence. Also I am replying to your individual comments, is there something wrong? GrenadinesDes (talk) 21:29, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

You're not replying under the original comment, that's what I was annoyed by. And if I'm still not sure what a pool house is. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

"f I'm still not sure what a pool house is." ??? I'm sorry, but I feel like you're being incredibly nitpicky on something so trivial. How does me explaining what a pool house is get this article closer to FA quality? GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:10, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

• Replaced "forestry" with "tree"
• The destruction of the mobile home was the most significant damage to come from that very specific area along the track, though I don't really like how you don't point out what makes the grammar here bad, but I'll try to fix it.

• My point is that what specifically about a double-wide makes it worth mentioning? Also, the bad grammar is that you went from "crossed/destroying/snapping/sustained". You changed the tense of the verbs. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Removed double-wide and fixed the grammar GrenadinesDes (talk) 21:31, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

There are two instances of double-wide mobile homes in the article. If you're keeping them, I want to know what makes them important, and if they're not important, why are they mentioned at all? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:42, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• Switched the mobile home part to the beginning.
• Added details on when it entered and exited the town, no times added though since I can't find clear information on that.

GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:00, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I was considering my own review, but I think Hink has covered nearly all the same issues I had. There one thing I would like to add to the comment about the use of strengthening and weakening: in most of the places where you say that the tornado weakened or strengthened it's not clear from the sources that the tornado was doing either at the time. The relationship between damage indicators and tornado strength isn't quite 1-to-1, so there being some gaps between EF2 or EF3 DIs doesn't necessarily imply that the tornado weakened in that time period. The way it's written now implies a higher degree of confidence in the tornado's strength at each point in time than is warranted. This summary from NWS Jackson includes the times when the tornado weakened or strengthened as well as a track map with the estimated areas corresponding to each EF-category and both heavily diverge from what you have here. I believe these should be reworded to not say strengthening or weakening except when the summary notes it. MCRPY22 (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Continuing.

• You never identify what a "violent" tornado is, which I noticed when I got to "the tornado became violent for the second time".
  • Just going to change it to EF4 intensity GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "The tornado then entered Attala County, weakening down to EF1 intensity, snapping or uprooting several hardwood and softwood trees, before strengthening back to EF2 intensity, snapping numerous trees." this could be stronger to avoid redundancies
  • Hopefully I removed the redundancies GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • It mentions in two different clauses in the same sentence that trees were snapped. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "The tornado traveled a few more miles through Oktibbeha County" - can you rewrite this to avoid "miles", since you don't have a metric conversion?
  • Sure, included a metric conversion. GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "Later on at 9:30 p.m. CDT, NWS upgraded the tornado to low-end EF4, with windspeeds up to 170 mph (270 km/h), with the path length starting from Tallulah and ending near Durant, making a path length of 97 miles (156 km), and the path width increasing to 1.75 miles (3,080 yd), with it being noted that surveyors were still investigating the damage in Choctaw County with uncertainties on whether or not it was one continuous tornado." - too long
  • Split up into 3 sentences GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • "Surveyors noted that they were still investigating the damage in Choctaw County with uncertainties on whether or not it was one continuous tornado." - again, this sounds like the article was written as the event was happening. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "On July 1, 2015, two researchers from the Florida State University's Department of Geography, Tyler Fricker and James B. Elsner, published a study looking into kinetic energy released by tornadoes when inflicting significant damage, using total kinetic energy (TKE) as a metric of destruction estimated from the fraction of the tornado path, using a model developed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that connects factual data with the theory. " - too long
  • Split up into 2 sentences GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• Very little of the 2nd paragraph of "Case studies" has anything to do with this tornado
  • I'll just get rid of it GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "The tornado caused $36 million in total damage, $35 million in property, and $1 million in agricultural damage in Louisiana and injured 16 people." - poorly written, grammar-wise, with the two "and"s, and the three damage totals.
  • Fixed GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "The tornado did $373.5 million in total damage, $351.03 million in property and $22.52 million in agricultural damage, including $144 million in Yazoo County alone, and ten people were killed, with 130 people injured in Mississippi across several counties." - similar problem here.
  • Fixed GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "In Yazoo City, more than 160 homes sustained moderate to major damage, and 107 homes destroyed." - missing word
  • Added the word GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • "and 107 homes destroyed" ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "and 18 agricultural areas, with 283 of them were destroyed" - multiple problems here. It implies the agricultural areas were destroyed, and the grammar is bad at the last part.
  • Fixed GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "Overall, 319 homes in Yazoo County were damaged, 114 homes in Choctaw County were damaged, 60 homes in Holmes County were damaged, 42 homes in Warren County were damaged, and 35 homes in Attala were damaged, with 100 residences in Yazoo County and 38 in Choctaw County designated uninhabitable." - this is too much of a list to be useful.
  • What makes it not useful? It's a list of homes affected in each counties. GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • The fact that it's a 49-word block of text. It's a run-on. It would make more sense in a table, but not in prose. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "In Yazoo County, nine homes funded by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) through the Rural Development's Self-Help Housing development program were demolished, with five of the homes being completed a year prior and four being nearly completed." - I'm not really sure what this means
  • Literally not hard to understand, 9 homes funded by USDA got destroyed. GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • But what's the significance of the USDA part, or the part that four homes were nearly completed? It's a lengthy and confusing sentence as it stands. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "Nationwide spokeswomen reported that 35 claims were placed by Monday, and she also stated that the company was not planning on adding a temporary claims center in the state." - the day of the week isn't helpful when no other part of the article has that. Also, what's the significance of including something a company was not planning to do?
  • "the day of the week isn't helpful when no other part of the article has that." Days of the week has been mentioned in other parts of the article. Though I'll remove the second half of the statement. GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • But there's no context for what day Monday was. And I'm not sure how useful it is to know that certain dates were Monday/Tuesday/Friday/etc. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• "Mississippi Farm Bureau's office in Yazoo City were serving customers, with the company's claims director reporting that over 390 reports of property losses were recorded to the bureau." - poorly written.
  • Fixed GrenadinesDes (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
    • "reported that over 390 reports" - that's still bad. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to stop here again. I'm reading way too many sentences that are either illogical, don't make sense why they're included, confusing, lengthy, or have other writing issues. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I feel like you're being incredibly nitpicky on something so trivial. - in that case, I am done reviewing the article, and I will be unwatching it from my watchlist, after being asked to review. I suggest you withdraw and get someone from the guild of copyeditors to copyedit the article. Yes, my comments might feel like a nitpick, but the article needs work, and FAC isn't the place to polish up an article. I'd also like to highlight these comments:

• "it seems like most of the issues you've pointed out is just the lack of understanding of tornado terminology considering you're more familiar with tropical cyclone terminology."
• "As I pointed out, it seems like most of the issues stems from little understanding of what certain tornado terminologies are"

I suggest getting someone who is not a weather expert, and working with them to explain the met-heavy jargon. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Coordinator comment. Sorry but after being open for more than six weeks and a very thorough and well-reasoned oppose, this does not look like it's on its way to achieving consensus anytime soon. As such, I'm timing this out. I suggest that you work on Hurricanehink's concerns away from the pressure of FAC and hopefully renominate it at some point, though no earlier than the usual two-week waiting period.

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. FrB.TG (talk) 21:29, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.