Talk:Wind power

message: There is a broken link on the "External links" section on the IEA's Dynamic Data Dashboard. It has been moved to a new domain which can be found here: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/renewables-2021-data-explorer?mode=market®ion=World&publication=2021&product=Total 
Could someone with access please update this? ~~ EnergyAnalyst2 (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You are not able to update this article yourself? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It is in requesting these edits that I seem to have gained access to edit them, I will correct that! Thanks for pointing it out. EnergyAnalyst2 (talk) 14:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request, Broken Link 

message: @Ita140188 You tagged because “The article seems to be exclusively about producing electricity from wind power, but then history section talks about windmills and sails” so you think that should be removed from history? Or if not what do you suggest? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it should be removed from history and the page on history of wind power would explain it only. More can be included on the development of the electricity producing wind turbine over time and what companies were involved on the Wind Power page history section. Also, should the definition be revised to Wind Power is the process of generating energy from the wind as apposed to useful work? (the short description of the article is about producing electricity) Just my thoughts. Knowledgegatherer23 (talk) 00:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: (or people involved) Knowledgegatherer23 (talk) 00:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

text: I think we can keep the information about historical use of wind power, but we need to be explicit from the lead that this article only deals with electricity production. The history section should then reflect this, briefly talking about pre-electricity uses but then focusing on the history of wind power for electricity production (which is mostly what it already does actually) --Ita140188 (talk) 09:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have excerpted - feel free to revert and solve the problem your way if you prefer Chidgk1 (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should non-electricity be in History section? 

message: I was interested in the information that Hammurabi might have used wind power and tried to find more details only to discover that every reference I found about this (on Wikipedia or otherwise) ultimately cites the 1976 book The Generation of electricity by wind power by E. Golding which has a single throwaway line about it and which itself only cites The Story of the Rotor by Anton Flettner from 1926, which has a single throwaway line with no source whatsoever. 
the Golding book: 
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Generation_of_Electricity_by_Wind_Po/lRojAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Hammurabi
the Flettner book: 
https://books.google.com/books?id=W99NAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&vq=hammurabi&dq=flettner%20the%20story%20of%20the%20rotor&pg=PA95#v=snippet&q=hammurabi&f=false
I have only just created an account to post this and can't edit the page myself since it's protected, but it seems to me that this information has no real source and should be removed? If so can someone with access remove it? Minovi (talk) 15:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  No legitimate source for the claim that Hammurabi had a plan to use wind power 

message: In the current version, the 'Economics' section is very limited. It mentions costs but fails to mention the value of the electricity generated by wind power plant. I suggest adding a few sentences and linking to the 'Merit Order' page, which describes the value problem of variable renewable energy in detail.
Likewise, the content of the 'Central Government' subsection under 'Politics' is very limited and I also found it misleading. The references are almost exclusively referring to offshore wind. The first sentence seem to indicate that new installations are "generally subsidy free", but I believe this refer to offshore wind power only. I suggest rewriting this section completely, shift focus to both onshore and offshore wind power, and broaden the geographical scope. Tove-88 (talk) 11:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economics and policy sections seem incomplete