Talk:Gulf Stream

Localised effects

As interesting as it might be that Plockton on the Isle of Skye has a warmer climate than Moscow, it is not correct. Plockton is on mainland Scotland (according to Google Maps) northeast of Kyle of Lochalsh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.128.75 (talk) 14:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Gulf Stream/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

• I think this article was improperly listed as a GA following its initial review. None of the issues raised by the reviewer were dealt with, yet the article was listed because it was "well-written".

• There are four outstanding requests for citation, some of them dating back to February 2007.

• The entire Localized effects section is uncited.

• I think the article needs to deal with the effects of global warming on the potential shutdown of the Gulf Stream, and what the effects of a shutdown might be.

• The phrase "Gulf Stream proper" is used a few times. Is there another (improper) Gulf Stream that it's being contrasted with?

• "The Gulf Stream oftentimes increases hurricanes or tropical cyclones by their winds and overall strength." Don't understand that at all. Does it increase the strength of hurricanes, or the frequency of hurricanes? How does it do that?

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the remaining two fact tags by using a source which mentions the winds in the Florida peninsula are easterly throughout the year, implying the warm gulf stream just offshore keeps temperatures moderate across the state. I complied with MOS regarding the section titles, which meant losing the Gulf Stream wording. Convert templates have been added. Sections on the effect of the Gulf Stream on cyclones and possible power generation from the Gulf Stream have been added. Images of the original map of the Gulf Stream, drawn by Franklin, and a hurricane which formed and moved along the Gulf Stream are now included. Are there any other issues in your mind that need to be fixed? Several were fixed (or no longer relevent) when I got around to editing the article. Thegreatdr (talk) 13:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• • Thanks to everyone for the work that's been done on this article. I'm closing this review now as keep. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

What's going on with these references?

None of the references in the section “Localized effects” seem to bear out the statements made. Reference 6 doesn’t say anything about the Gulf Stream at all, reference 7 doesn’t say anything about Martha’s Vineyard, Cape Cod or anything about the climatic effects of the Gulf stream. Reference 8 doesn’t say anything about Scotland, and reference 9 doesn’t mention the Gulf Stream at all or say anything about climate, or that Moscow is one degree south of this part of Ireland. Reference 10 doesn’t say anything about the effect of the Gulf Stream on the coastal climate of Norway. Am I missing something here? Richerman (talk) 00:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Little edit war

Re [1] etc. Please take this to Shutdown_of_thermohaline circulation#Bryden measurements_reported_late_2005 where it belongs. And distinguish (which the newspapers will never manage to do, which is one reason for not using them) the Gulf Stream from the THC William M. Connolley (talk) 20:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

There is no edit war - I reverted an edit that you made without giving your reasons, other than an edit summary that said "no it didn't (of course)" I then edited the information as it didn't seem to match what was said in the newspaper article. You don't just remove something that's properly referenced because in your opinion it's wrong. I'm aware that newspapers often get the science wrong but if you're going to remove something, please give a proper explanation of why you're doing it and then others will be able to decide whether your edit was justified or not. Richerman (talk) 21:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Gulf Stream/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article no longer meets the GA criteria as the facts given are not verifiable. There are a number of "citation needed" tags that haven't been addressed and, as I pointed out on the talk page over a month ago, many of the references used don't support the facts, especially those given in "localised effects". Richerman (talk) 13:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I will take another stab at defending this article. I can see, in a couple cases, why there would be issues. Give me an hour or two, which is likely all I'll need to resolve these issues. Thegreatdr (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The last sentence reference of the Discovery and Properties section references someone who doesn't make the connection that the warmer water west of Europe is caused by the Gulf Stream and North Atlantic Drift. Normally in wikipedia, minority opinions can be mentioned within articles, but this guy's logic appears faulty. For clarification sake, I propose we remove the last line. I decided to add some meat to the minority opinion, just in case you still wanted it in there. Otherwise, all the reference issues have been taken care of. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I've added a bit about an oceanic climate to that further clarify the sentence (I hope!) I'm happy with the rest of it now except for the bit about palm trees in Ireland as I think that's a bit of a myth too. I removed a reference about that earlier today as the picture showed Cordyline Australis which isn't a palm, although it looks like one, and is hardy in most of the UK as it will tolerate temps down to -10 celsius. I suspect those in the picture are the same species, however, the reference does support what you say so that's fair enough. Thanks for your hard work. Richerman (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Didn't I fix that before your edit? Thegreatdr (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, yes - it looks like you did - I must have been looking at the earlier version Richerman (talk) 17:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Man, I come charging in to help, and Thegreatdr has already fixed everything! It appears to me as if all concerns with existing and non-existing refs have been addressed, well done. -RunningOnBrains 00:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Unit confusion?

The phrase "The Gulf Stream transports about 1.4 petawatts of heat, equivalent to 100 times the world energy demand" confuses me awfully can someone clarify the units?

• It implies that the world energy energy demand is 14 terawatts. However the 'watt' is a measurement of power, not energy
• It explicitly says the Gulf Stream 'transports 1.4[PW] of heat'. This is so unclear to me! Is it saying that the Gulf Stream transfers 1.4PJ of energy past any arbitrary point per second? That the entire gulf stream transfers heat energy to it's surroundings at a rate of 1.4PW? That if all the warn water currently in the gulf stream were cooled to the temperature of it's surroundings then 1.4PJ of energy would have been released? Maybe it's just late!

If anyone feels my queries can't be answered, and the phrase should be changed, it presents a problem: the phrase is copied verbatim from the referenced document so (copyright issues aside) I'm not sure what the best course would be. 81.97.210.186 (talk) 01:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Formation?

I have to say how disappointed I am with the lack of 'formation' section in this article. There is not one mention of Western Boundary Intensification, the main driving force behind the Gyres which create it...key words might be coriolis effect, geostrophic flow around north atlantic ocean, asymmetry around circulation gyres. Unfortunately i dont have time to add this so i hope someone kindly takes my suggestion and adds some more information. im surprised that this article was even considered for GA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.5.164 (talk) 12:30, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

There, the content is added. I'll more fully reference the section later this week. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry that the article didn't come up to your exacting standards. maybe if you could use some of your precious time to make a contribution, instead of expecting others to do it, you might find the articles more to your liking. I see you did manage to find the time to read and make (unsigned) comments about the Pacific ocean article as well. Wikipedia is a collective enterprise carried forward by unpaid volunteers. The mantra is "if it's not right - fix it yourself." Lucky for you that Thegreatdr is such an obliging person, or you'd be doomed to a life of disappointment. Richerman (talk) 22:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad it was brought up. I'd never heard of it before his comment. The changes have been made, including all the appropriate referencing, to maintain GA. Thegreatdr (talk) 13:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The Gulf Stream has (temporarily, presumably) moved

An unprecedented extreme in the northern hemisphere atmospheric circulation has driven a strong direct connecting current between the Gulf Stream and the West Greenland current.

• http://leftoutside.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/bugger-a-breif-introduction-to-climate-contradictions/
• http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/1/6/822520/-Freak-Current-Takes-Gulf-Stream-to-Greenland

Also (Possibly) related:

• Alarm over dramatic weakening of Gulf Stream - http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/dec/01/science.climatechange

Regards, Ben Aveling 05:55, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The grauniad was wrong [2] so lets not make the same mistake of jumping too early William M. Connolley (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

One would hope that wikipedians would be steering away from blogs as references, no? Thegreatdr (talk) 20:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The direct current could very well be a glitch, though there looks to be more of a connection between the two currents than previously seen. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 16:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Myth?

http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/gs/ interested to know more about the truth behind the theory that the gulf stream affects the milder temperatures in Europe.-NeF (talk) 13:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

W Europe is mostly warmer in winter than E America because it is downwind of the ocean is correct. I think people have subsequently argued that ocean heat transport matters more than Seager et al think, but not that it is dominant William M. Connolley (talk) 21:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Uncited text

I don't understand the relevance of the banner at the top added with this edit. Any text added to this article needs its own citations. You can't use another wikipedia article as a citation (which is what the banner suggests) as wikipedia is not a reliable source. Richerman (talk) 13:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, having read the page for the template used I can now see the rationale for it - it's to give attribution to the editor who contributed it to the first article. However copying uncited text from one article to another is not a good idea; the text still needs to be cited so I've added a fact tag to it. Richerman (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I see the fact tag has been removed with the edit summary "rv fact tag: the cite is in the very next para (though I've no idea if it is accurate)". If that is the case the first use of reference needs moving forward into the previous paragraph; you can't have an uncited paragraph in a GA article. I'm not going to do it myself as I don't have access to the book cited so I don't know if it's accurate either. Richerman (talk) 21:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Twas I. It looks to me quite clear from context that the cite applies to both paras. I can see no reason why a cite can't span two paras. However, if that is a GA rule, then remove the GA status William M. Connolley (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Of course it's not a "GA rule" - the GA criteria is that it is well written and properly referenced. It's just not logical to have two paragraphs supported by one reference source, with no instances of it in the first paragraph and two instances in the second paragraph - one of which is in the middle of a sentence. Richerman (talk) 23:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Using the snippet view of the source book in Google books I've now managed to work through the text and reference it myself. Richerman (talk) 01:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

FYI, you can use the <ref name="blahblah">Ref stuff</ref> and "<ref name="blahblah">to simply duplicate the citation. NW (Talk) 21:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused - isn't that exactly what I did in this edit and in this edit? Richerman (talk) 00:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

"Although there has been recent debate"

What is exactly the meaning of subject in this period: "Although there has been recent debate, there is consensus that the climate of Western Europe and Northern Europe is warmer than it would otherwise be due to the North Atlantic drift, one of the branches from the tail of the Gulf Stream." Thank you and greetings from Italy. --188.153.38.223 (talk) 22:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The middle clause is the one you're looking for. I'm not sure the emphasis is right William M. Connolley (talk) 23:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Neither I. Thank you, William and excuse me, I intended to write sentence, not period! Ciao. --188.153.38.223 (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I just found this sentence: "However, the extent of its contribution to the actual temperature differential between North America and Europe is a matter of dispute as there is a recent minority opinion... et cetera". This is the matter. Maybe better to explain the sense in the previous sentence, or to link at that point. Bye.--188.153.38.223 (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are need for —131.165.160.138 (talk) 08:27, 5 January 2011 (UTC) sdf

Not changed - Uncertain of what it is you feel is wrong, please feel free to re-tag with an explanation. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:18, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Apparent contradiction

The statement follows the eastern coastlines of the United States and Newfoundland seems at odds with the map as regards Newfoundland. JH (talk page) 21:18, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Which map? The Gulf Stream travels parallel to the coastlines, but is at more of an angle as it approaches the northern regions and stops gaining latitude for a while. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 16:00, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

history

A useful book, not cited here, is James Delbourgo and Nicholas Dew 'Science and empire in the Atlantic world' Routledge, 2008 .The first chart, according to Joyce Chaplin' s article in this volume, was published in London in 1768. Pamour (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)