Talk:Little Ice Age

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Environment / Climate change  (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Climate change task force.


London was in the Little Ice age had winters 15F degrees colder than they are today by average — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbowellls (talkcontribs) 19:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Jimbowells has been indefinitely blocked for vandalism and such. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

21st Century mini-ice age conjecture[edit]

Apparently we will all put our heads in the sand and deny the existence of this theory. Two of you have struck any link to this article in the Little Ice Age article. Apparently you don't know how to "compare and contrast," distinguish or use a metaphor. This is your religious orthodoxy. Not mine. Plausibly, this could easily be included and would be a good fit in the Little Ice Age#Solar activity or Little Ice Age#Orbital cycles sections. I would think that readers should be apprised of its existence, and make up their minds after they examine the literature. The article as presently written is not WP:POV. I do not think that censorship, suppression or heresy analysis is appropriate. The matters should be freely discussed and vetted. 7&6=thirteen () 22:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Discuss edits please, not editors. You have mischaracterized my revert. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
I did not mention any editor(s). If the shoe fits... Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen () 01:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
I am discussing edits. To be clear, I am not saying that the theory is correct. But I am saying that it exists as a theory, needs to be discussed and considered. And that includes appropriate links within this article, to inform and empower readers so they can find the other related article. I tried the "See also" section and that was removed. I tried Little Ice Age#Solar activity and that was removed. I am suggesting Little Ice Age#Orbital cycles. All I was trying to do was put in a link, and leave the article without regurgitating the material already in 21st Century mini-ice age conjecture.
Rather than WP:Edit war with you over that, I call that to your attention and hope that the two of you figure it out. 7&6=thirteen () 13:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
I am saying no, sorry, its still not worth linking to. There's no need for impatience. If the article you want to link to turns into something worth having, then fine we can link to it. If it remains junk, we can AFD it William M. Connolley (talk) 16:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
It rather is not "the theory", rather it seems like a fringe conjecture. With only references from the Daily Mail, The Times of India, a German newspaper, and a blog - and based on a Russian "Science and Public Policy Institute" report it should not be linked. Unless solid science sources discuss it -- it simply deserves afd. Vsmith (talk) 18:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate data smoothing[edit]

Thoughts on this analysis?

"While the idea that Europe experienced a Little Ice Age is widespread, its statistical basis is at best exiguous, and appears to stem from inappropriate efforts to smooth data that are actually random. At the same time, most of the anecdotal evidence admits more simple explanations than climate change."Shtove (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Might be worth adding, reffing to their papers rather than (or as well as) this blog post. These are primary studies - ideally we'd use secondary academic sources which may not exist yet. Johnbod (talk) 13:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes. Can't do anything myself - touchy subject!Shtove (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Little Ice Age. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

De-politicize article a little?[edit]

I was interested in information on the little ice age.

Instead of quality information just saying how much colder it was, that information is buried deep in the article.

And instead of a chart showing average temperature now to the present in degrees ...

... it has an unfriendly chart showing temperature variance which doesn't mean anything to me or probably most people.

Is there a particular reason this article can't have the average temperature and a decent chart? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:48, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The chart at the top needs to be changed[edit]

The medieval warming period had temperatures warmer or the same as current temps. The chart shows some kind of wild variation from consensus data for the modern period. The source seems to be an interest group called "Berkeley Earth" — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:48, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Nope, overall you're wrong. All the BEST. . . dave souza, talk 10:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)