Talk:Solar power

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Solar power has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
May 22, 2009 Good article nominee Listed
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7  
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Note icon
This article is Uncategorized.
Taskforce icon
This article or list is a nominee for the Version 0.7 release of Wikipedia. See the nominations page for more details.

For older archives see prior page Talk:Solar energy.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Solar power. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:41, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Citation Needed Mark[edit]

Hello, I am new to editing Wikipedia and trying to get some experience doing edits so I can add technical information and data for certain subjects that I will be writing technical articles for such as chemical identification and storage, the various containers for large-scale storage of industry-used chemicals, among others.

I do not have authority yet to edit this document, (although it is my goal to get to that point), but I have the source and information for the missing citation in this article and I wanted to contribute to fixing it.

The source is a book: Crises of the 21st Century: Start Drilling-the Year 2020 Is Coming Fast Author: John Durbin Husher Publisher: iUniverse Date: 2009

Thank you, A. S. Eccles (talk) 16:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi A. S. Eccles, welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for providing this source, do you know what page or pages are relevant here? Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. No, I am new to Wikipedia and am not sure what you mean by "what page or pages are relevant here?" A. S. Eccles (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I mean what page of the book is relevant. e.g. the citation is from p. 239. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 09:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding on my part. The applicable page number is pg. 217. Thanks A. S. Eccles (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2017 (UTC) Thanks, and this is for the citation needed marker in the "Feed-in tariffs (FIT)" section right? Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 16:13, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it is specifically for that sentence with the [citation needed] mark ending in "return on investment is better". The section with "Feed-in tariffs" technically needs a different citation all to its own as that information comes from another source. The source for the "Feed-in tariffs" section is also a book:

Title: Alternative Energy Technologies: Opportunities and Markets
Author: Robert N. Castellano
Publisher: Archives contemporaines
Date: 2012
Relevant Page: 23

A. S. Eccles (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2017[edit]

100000 watts can power a house for a whole day Elliot Krantz (talk) 19:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

What house? Not done, please provide a WP:reliable source and more detail. Vsmith (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
A heads up, Elliot Krantz has yet to produce one serious edit. Dougmcdonell (talk) 00:49, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2017[edit]


Joeyenriquez (talk) 06:40, 15 October 2017 (UTC)


  1. ^ Holowka, Taryn. "Top four benefits of installing solar panels on you home". LEED. Taryn Holowka. Retrieved 5 April 2017. 
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. SparklingPessimist Scream at me! 07:20, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2017[edit]


Photovoltaics were initially solely used as a source of electricity for small and medium-sized applications, from the calculator powered by a single solar cell to remote homes powered by an off-grid rooftop PV system.


Photovoltaics were initially solely used as a source of electricity for small and medium-sized applications, from the calculator powered by a single solar cell to remote homes powered by an off-grid rooftop PV system. This highlights an advantage of solar over other renewable energy sources, such as wind, water or geothermal power, partially offsetting its generally higher cost: namely that light can be readily, reliably and relatively inobtrusively captured close to the point of power consumption when there is sufficient surface area, avoiding moving parts and the additional costs of a power distribution network, particularly when paired with rechargable batteries.

Not done for now: Please provide a source for this. ToThAc (talk) 16:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)