Thank you (",)
Thanks for comments and please keep them coming
Thanks very much for investing energy and time contributing thoughts on efforts to draft a new first lead paragraph for Global warming. Please note I just posted ver 5 of my idea, and would welcome further pro/con criticism. I'm attempting to ping everyone who has taken time to speak up after past versions. If I overlooked anyone, please let me know. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 3 August
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Climate Change edits
As an aside, I appreciate that climate change is a contentious issue, but so long as statements which have come from a reasonable source e.g. NSIDC are cited, I don't see the problem.
The wiki article suffers from bias, however. Extrapolating dodgy data is dodgy science. A classic example of that is Arctic sea ice loss. If you take a look at the satellite data which is only available since 1979:- http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphone/images/iphone.anomaly.global.png You can see a moderate decline from 1979 through to 2000, and that what looked like an alarming decline from 2000 to 2012, followed by the situation today not looking dissimilar to most of the period from 1979 through to 2000 i.e. an apparant recovery. Whether this recovery will continue or not, who knows. What's clear from the arctic sea ice data and the antarctic sea ice data, is that you can not conclusively conclude from either data sets that an increase in CO2 and any global warming that that may have produced can be directly correlated to any sea ice melt. Climate models have thus far failed. That doesn't negate the science, but what it should tell you is that the jury is still out and there is no settled science. Science isn't a popularity contest, that's politics. / Moved and signed for Jdey123, prokaryotes (talk) 12:49, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
- The numbers show the decline in recent decades, from the 1979–2000 mean 7.0 declining to 5.4 (millions of square kilometers). prokaryotes (talk) 11:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I have noticed that often you use the long form of an internal Wikipedia link in discussions and on talk pages. For example, at this talk page you provided an internal link that appeared like this. Not only does this appear to other users as being a link that leads off Wikipedia, it's not the standard practiced method of linking internal links. Instead it should appear like this. Notice how it has not arrows or lock symbol beside it? That indicates it's simply an internal link within Wikipedia. Nearly everything on Wikipedia with a few exceptions like history diffs can be linked in this way. Cheers, Mkdwtalk 22:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Further to, I fixed the link on the page above and closed the discussion. I then noticed you sometimes do the internal links correctly when linking to articles, so perhaps you weren't aware the links can be done to any space on Wikipedia. Mkdwtalk 22:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
ZMapp has been nominated for Did You Know
|Hello, Prokaryotes. ZMapp, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated for WikiProject Did you know consideration to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 17:05, 20 August 2014 (UTC)|
You've got mail!
I had to remove the Category:Meteorology/Climatology that you have put on articles such as Katabatic wind and Atmospheric circulation. Both where already in subcategories of Meteorology (e.g. Katabatic wind is in the Wind category which is a sub-category of Meteorology). Please take a look at Meteorology and Climatology subcategories before future category adding.
- Ok. --prokaryotes (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- Pierre cb, is there a Wikipedia guideline for category taxonomy? Sometimes i think it makes sense to add main categories, i.e. it may help people to better understand a particular topic. --prokaryotes (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2014 (UTC)