This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Meteorology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Meteorology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Currently, the article is at B class as the article does meet B class criteria. To further it along to GA criteria...Would try to plop more Wikipedia:Citation templates into the mainline body of the text. The sources are given generally for the article as a whole, but to progress, each paragraph should have a minimum of 1 to 2 inline citations in them, and positively every fact stated should have a footnote citation as well.
A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click |here.
This article is currently of high importance due to economics; with the arctic countries remapping their boundaries to drill perchance for oil with the polar ice cap shrinkage, less ice problems and warmer arctic climate.
Would perhaps try to include these other wiki article into the article perhaps a see also
"The results highlighted that for around 1900 years temperatures steadily dropped, caused by fluctuations in the earth's orbit that pushed the planet slightly further away from the sun and culminated in a period of mini ice ages during the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. However, during the last 100 years temperatures have begun rising, despite the fact that the earth has moved no nearer to the sun." The writing here is wrong, the conclusions would be laughed at in serious scientific circles and it is wildly inappropriate to allow this to be published, even with references. Studies show proximity to the sun are not highly determinative of temperature as may be seen in tracking the temperature of the eccentric Pluto. I do not have the expertise to write this, but I can spot a mistake. DDB (talk) 06:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
We live on a planet third in line from the sun. I should think any distance from the sun, be it closer or farther, would constitute a significant change planet temperature. (And By significant I mean measurable in any sense) If you disagree with the fully-referenced sources I recommend you look around for other sources that dispute it. 07:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackal Killer (talk • contribs)
I've tried to clarify this section. The Science article refers to changes in the precession leading to earth being closer to the sun in arctic summer, rather than the earth simply getting closer to the sun (the average distance hasn't changed). Some of the news articles didn't state this clearly, which is the problem with relying on the news articles rather than the original publication as a source. I've brought the statements in line with the original Science article and added that as a reference in more places, while keeping the news refs since they are easier for most people to access, and they get the general point right. StephenHudson (talk) 10:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
The graphs of duration of daylight seem to contradict each other. Which one is the good one? The captions are not clear about it, and seem to present one as the duration of the day (which is always 24 hours, no?) and the duration of daylight (which seems more appropriate). In general, they have the same pattern, but angles are much more pronounced in the top one (duration of day), and the latitudes seem slightly different between the two graphs as well. Clarification is needed! CielProfond (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)