Talk:Drought

message: The "Causes" section is extremely poorly documented. There is little to no documentation in the first and arguably most important paragraph. It badly needs to be fixed.
Battleghost (talk) 01:26, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Causes" section very poorly cited 

message: I don't think it is. --Fev 04:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That phrase could have been read to mean different things and I have already tweaked the article to remove it NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Global phenomenon?

message: I just ran across this article, and understand the previous pleas for help over previous years.  The sections of the article have been placed in a more logical order.  Segments of existing C, good, and featured articles relating to drought, erosion, and dry season (with their supporting references) were included where they seemed to be appropriate.  The gallery is being slowly deconstructed with the images within it fitting on the right of the lengthening article -- article size has increased 20%.  Thegreatdr (talk) 01:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Much improved, thanks! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 09:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent improvement

message: I can't find anything in 29 ^ Smith A.B. and R. Katz, 2013: U.S. Billion-dollar weather and climate disasters: Data sources, trends, accuracy and biases. Natural Hazards, 67, 387–410, doi:10.1007/s11069-013-0566-5 that supports the statement "Activities resulting in global climate change are expected to trigger droughts with a substantial impact on agriculture[28][29]throughout the world, and especially in developing nations." It discusses climate change and billion dollar plus agricultural losses, but doesn't suggest there is a strong connection between the two in the effects of the incidents, and in fact goes out of its way to say they cannot show a correlation.  Should it be removed?  It implies weight to the argument that is not supplied. Cwmillerjr (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference does not support statement

message: Aridity ("drought") indexes that can be included in the article (after ):
* De Martonne Aridity Index
* Emberger Aridity Index
* UNEP Aridity Index
* Thornthwaite Classification
* Gaussen-Bagnouls Classification— Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.9.10.163 (talk) 04:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Aridity indexes

message: Is there a Cetiera(didnt see one in article)When a drought is over? Live in US State of California .Tha has had a drought(especailly Southern California area where I live) for years.Right now Rain Storm after rainstorm But still there a OFFICIAL DROUGHT! Thanks!Eddson storms (talk) 04:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just when does A drought end? 

message: for Drought Vulnerability I would like to note the following in "Consequences of drought" --> Effects vary according to vulnerability. For example, subsistence farmers are more likely to migrate during drought because they do not have alternative food-sources. Areas with populations that depend on water sources as a major food-source are more vulnerable to famine. One can understand that if such scenarios prevail, agricultural production and development of a region or country, particularly in the Mediterranean area, will be reduced due to projected future water and soil degradation. It will also increase the imports of agricultural products from other countries which would not have been affected as seriously by the forecasted impacts of climate change (reference: Tsesmelis, D.E.; Karavitis, C.A.; Oikonomou, P.D.; Alexandris, S.; Kosmas, C. Assessment of the Vulnerability to Drought and Desertification Characteristics Using the Standardized Drought Vulnerability Index (SDVI) and the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Index (ESAI). Resources 2019, 8, 6.) 
Tsesmelis (talk) 19:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. Self-promoted primary journal article that has unclear relevance and impact concerning the subtopic.  See also WP:NOTJOURNAL Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2020 

message: Please link to the disambiguation page. Please add the hatnote
-- 65.92.134.182 (talk) 03:34, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Done – Thjarkur (talk) 08:59, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit request

message: "
Droughts affect food production and human society, so they are considered a disaster, of natural, supernatural or human cause (which itself could be supernatural causes, malediction, sin, ...). It is among the earliest documented climatic events, present in the Epic of Gilgamesh and tied to the Biblical story of Joseph's arrival in and the later Exodus from Ancient Egypt.[6] "
this part of the text seems odd for a wikipedia article on natural phenomena
— Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 
:It took a few readings to try to understand the original intent but it wasn't as laughable as it looked at first pass.  Anyway, thanks, I tried to clean it up a bit. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not appropiate for a wiki article 

message: I think the role of ocean currents in droughts should be discussed some. CessnaMan1989 (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ocean Currents 

message: We should perhaps add some details about drought proofing and introduce the term, see e.g. https://www.preventionweb.net/news/view/72817 (there is no Wikipedia article or redirect for drought proofing yet). EMsmile (talk) 12:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drought proofing 

message: Suggest the illustration showing Obama et al discussing California drought with farmers be updated to a more graphic illustration of the agricultural impacts of drought.  ASRASR (talk) 10:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that that picture wasn't very good and have removed it now. EMsmile (talk) 02:25, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just noticed that you User:Castncoot recently put the Obama image back in that I had removed a year ago. Any particular reason? If you think it's a great picture, I suggest you rather add it to one of the U.S. specific articles like Climate change in the United States or alike. This one here is a global article about drought so we have to be mindful to not have it as a U.S. centric article. EMsmile (talk) 12:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Coincidence, this is the first time I have seen that image. But obviously great minds think alike. Castncoot (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

text:  I don't think the new image that you chose for the lead, User:Castncoot, is better than the Australian image (the fact that the Australian image was from 2006 is irrelevant - your riverbed image has no year with it, does it make it any better because it might (or might not) be more recent?). See on the right hand side.   And is it a coincidence that once again you chose an image from the U.S.? How about we set up an image collage of 2x2 (like for sustainable energy)? This way we can prevent one country "dominating" the imagery of the lead. Also I think it's important to show an agriculture type image, not a dried up river bed, as it then also shows some impacts of drought at the same time. EMsmile (talk) 12:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  adding the Australian image on the right for comparison (I am not saying it's an ideal image either but I think it's pretty good).  EMsmile (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The California image screams DROUGHT!!!!! The Australian image looks like a nice large pastoral land, but never in a million years would I associate it with drought without a caption to steer me in the direction of thinking ‘drought’. Btw, California and the Western US are actually suffering from a prolonged ‘megadrought’ now, while eastern Australia benefits (with regards to drought) from the negative Indian Ocean dipole. In any case, this is not about any particular country, but I really have no idea why that Australian picture is even in this article. Castncoot (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  The California image does not scream drought to me at all. The river could have lower flow than usual also for other reasons, e.g. higher abstraction rates and groundwater pumping by farmers, or holding back more water in a dam, or it might be a seasonal river (not all rivers flow all year around). I think if you show the Australian image to anyone who knows anything about farming, they would say "it screams drought!" as the crops cannot grow but are just brown and wither away. I guess it depends on where you've lived and the experiences you've made. I've lived in Australia for many years and for me that is a typical drought picture. But anyhow - how about my suggestion to pick 4 images, then to show a range of different drought conditions? Perhaps it would help to have an image that shows crops that are a lot smaller and less healthy than normal? Or cattle that is really thin and looking unhealthy from drought? EMsmile (talk) 17:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

text: the collage is not yet ideal, I see it as a discussion starter. I think it could work really well once we pick a suitable set of 4 images. EMsmile (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don’t have a problem with the lead collage concept at all, EMsmile! :) What separately puzzles me however is that you seem to be putting farming ahead of potable water needed for drinking and cooking, and also clean water for bathing, etc. Of course agriculture is extraordinarily important. But if people can’t drink water in the first place, they won’t be able to live to farm; i.e., lack of potable water is an existential threat, and this is is the direction that California and parts of the Western US are headed, and this is why California should be expected to lead pictorially. Australia is not in quite that same predicament, but I agree Australia should also be included in the discussion, from the farming standpoint. Castncoot (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not sure how much you know about drought conditions in many African countries? They are often far worse than California with regards to malnutrition, children dying, people migrating etc. So I don't think "California should be expected to lead pictorially" is fair at all (unless for someone who lives in the U.S. maybe). Drinking water makes up a tiny proportion of all of household's water needs. If needed, drinking water can be supplied by trucks but the water needed to have crops grow, or ecosystems maintained, wetlands etc. cannot be brought in by trucks. No rain means no crops means starvation for many African subsistence farmers. Hence why I think agriculture is the bigger risk from drought than supplying cities with drinking water.... Wildfires is another one (and Australia has been hugely affected by those). In any case, I would not be able to "rank" the consequences of drought and the countries affected by drought. If we have a collage in the lead like the one I proposed we could show images from 4 different regions of the world, and 4 different types of impacts: impacts on crops, on wildfires, on ecosystems and on water supply. Also with regards to water supply, keep in mind that we have separate articles on those, e.g. water scarcity and water scarcity in Africa. Water scarcity can be caused by droughts and also be other factors (economic water scarcity). EMsmile (talk) 19:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I know very well exactly how dire the situation is in Somalia and other countries in the region as well as across Africa, and it’s tragic. But as you yourself have alluded, the issue here is that the title of this article is ‘Drought’, and not ‘Water Scarcity’. For a highly civilized society like California and the Western US to actually experience the natural phenomenon of the worst megadrought in 1,200 years from a new normal in climate to the extent of an existential threat is all the more that shocking, as opposed to most third world countries in Africa and elsewhere where infrastructure is poor and corruption is rife, creating a huge man-made water scarcity problem, of course exacerbated by drought, which is not the case in the Western US or in Australia. (By the way, the intensity of drought in California in its truest sense and definition is far greater in magnitude than in Australia; and massive wildfires have become a year-round phenomenon in the Western U.S., particularly California, to the point where firefighters from Australia have flown TO the US to volunteer to help!). All this being said, I would be OK with for example, a collage of four images in the lead, starting with the California picture for the reasons mentioned above, then one image of Eastern Africa, one of Western Africa, and one from Australia. Castncoot (talk) 21:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for these additional explanations, interesting. So let's focus on the four pictures that we want to use. I'd say just one from Africa, not two. We could also have one from an Asian country. Europe also gets more droughts, think Spain, Italy, even Germany (forest fires there as well); so either Europe or Australia - which would give us 2 from Global North and 2 from Global South. I am pondering over what image is good for "drought" and which is good for "water scarcity" in comparison. The former is simply the absence of rain (well, OK, I am thinking of the type called "Meteorological drought"). How do you show the absence of rain? By showing what it does to vegetation, ecosystems and farms. Whereas water scarcity is more about people and their access to water, right? Looking at the water scarcity article, the images used there are actually mostly maps and charts. More emphasis there is on topics around population growth, urbanisation, water used up by agriculture, access to water supply. But there is a little bit of overlap between the two articles (perhaps unavoidable). EMsmile (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: How about California, Somalia, South Australia, and Namibia? We would have to find an appropriate Somalia image if possible of course. Although Namibia and Somalia are technically on the same continent, they lie in entirely different regions and (primarily) different hemispheres that in spirit they could be on two different continents. I really don’t think Europe or South America is at the point to qualify for a lead picture at this time. And it is self-explanatory for Antarctica not to qualify as well. Castncoot (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think that Namibia would be relevant: A drought in a desert type arid country with low population density is not very exciting/important. A drought picture from India, Pakistan or China I would find more relevant. EMsmile (talk) 22:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, agreed. (The Namibia picture is already on the page, and that’s why I mentioned it. But I’m with you on that, which is why I didn’t propose the Atacama Desert in Chile.) Maybe this is what you were referring to:
Castncoot (talk) 01:23, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, the status quo of the page now is also acceptable. Castncoot (talk) 03:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the collage would work out much better than just the one image from California. Have replaced the black and white image from India with an agricultural image from the U.S. for now:
File:Corn shows the affect of drought.jpg|Agricultural changes. Droughts, rising temperatures, and extreme weather negatively impact agriculture. Shown: Texas, US (2013)..
 EMsmile (talk) 09:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the ping, but I don't have the bandwidth to look at this :( Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 16:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe a collage of 6 images would work then. There are many images indeed worthy of representation and this should not become a competition between countries or regions for representation, for goodness sake. Castncoot (talk) 21:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

text:  Just to give readers an idea of the magnitude and intensity of the California meteorological megadrought:—the fact that this can occur in a developed country not only shocks the mind but should also be even more alarming vis-a-vis droughts in developing countries with poor infrastructure and fingerprints of corruption all over those droughts. Therein the essentiality of the placed image. Castncoot (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure if a collage of 6 would add more value than a collage of 4 because drought photos look rather similar all around the world, don't they? It's usually very dry soil or much smaller rivers and lakes than normal. But if you or someone prefers a collage of 6, OK (the article on city even has a collage of 9 by the way). Regarding California: personally I find a drought more worrisome and shocking when it results in loss of lives (like in East Africa). The drought in California might shock you more if you live in the United States but Wikipedia is written with a global audience in mind so I think we should be mindful of not projecting what we find most relevant onto everyone else. Readers from all over the world should feel included and addressed when reading Wikipedia articles. To date, many many Wikipedia articles are US centric or Europe centric simply because a majority of the Wikipedia volunteers currently come from those regions (this problem is well documented (see e.g. WP:BIAS). So we should make an extra effort to reduce that US and Euro centricity wherever we can (including with respect to images used), especially for topics that are global in nature, like droughts. EMsmile (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I respectfully disagree. Notability is notability, reliably sourced, regardless of where it originates, and that’s the only metric that counts for me. Let’s not open a Pandora's box here. Best, Castncoot (talk) 22:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, let's see if there are any other people who're watching this page who are keen to jump into the discussion. Either way, I have now replaced the one image in the lead with the collage of 4 images. I think it shows the varied impacts of drought quite well. The images and caption could now be fine-tuned further e.g. if anyone wants to replace one of the two images from the U.S. with an image from Asia. EMsmile (talk) 10:34, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illustration improvement 

message: Here is an example, see on the right. Droughts can cause wildfires which is why I think a wildfire image would be good, with the right caption.
 EMsmile (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: the collage is not yet ideal, I see it as a discussion starter. I think it could work really well once we pick a suitable set of 4 images. EMsmile (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I don’t have a problem with the lead collage concept at all, EMsmile! :) What separately puzzles me however is that you seem to be putting farming ahead of potable water needed for drinking and cooking, and also clean water for bathing, etc. Of course agriculture is extraordinarily important. But if people can’t drink water in the first place, they won’t be able to live to farm; i.e., lack of potable water is an existential threat, and this is is the direction that California and parts of the Western US are headed, and this is why California should be expected to lead pictorially. Australia is not in quite that same predicament, but I agree Australia should also be included in the discussion, from the farming standpoint. Castncoot (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not sure how much you know about drought conditions in many African countries? They are often far worse than California with regards to malnutrition, children dying, people migrating etc. So I don't think "California should be expected to lead pictorially" is fair at all (unless for someone who lives in the U.S. maybe). Drinking water makes up a tiny proportion of all of household's water needs. If needed, drinking water can be supplied by trucks but the water needed to have crops grow, or ecosystems maintained, wetlands etc. cannot be brought in by trucks. No rain means no crops means starvation for many African subsistence farmers. Hence why I think agriculture is the bigger risk from drought than supplying cities with drinking water.... Wildfires is another one (and Australia has been hugely affected by those). In any case, I would not be able to "rank" the consequences of drought and the countries affected by drought. If we have a collage in the lead like the one I proposed we could show images from 4 different regions of the world, and 4 different types of impacts: impacts on crops, on wildfires, on ecosystems and on water supply. Also with regards to water supply, keep in mind that we have separate articles on those, e.g. water scarcity and water scarcity in Africa. Water scarcity can be caused by droughts and also be other factors (economic water scarcity). EMsmile (talk) 19:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I know very well exactly how dire the situation is in Somalia and other countries in the region as well as across Africa, and it’s tragic. But as you yourself have alluded, the issue here is that the title of this article is ‘Drought’, and not ‘Water Scarcity’. For a highly civilized society like California and the Western US to actually experience the natural phenomenon of the worst megadrought in 1,200 years from a new normal in climate to the extent of an existential threat is all the more that shocking, as opposed to most third world countries in Africa and elsewhere where infrastructure is poor and corruption is rife, creating a huge man-made water scarcity problem, of course exacerbated by drought, which is not the case in the Western US or in Australia. (By the way, the intensity of drought in California in its truest sense and definition is far greater in magnitude than in Australia; and massive wildfires have become a year-round phenomenon in the Western U.S., particularly California, to the point where firefighters from Australia have flown TO the US to volunteer to help!). All this being said, I would be OK with for example, a collage of four images in the lead, starting with the California picture for the reasons mentioned above, then one image of Eastern Africa, one of Western Africa, and one from Australia. Castncoot (talk) 21:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for these additional explanations, interesting. So let's focus on the four pictures that we want to use. I'd say just one from Africa, not two. We could also have one from an Asian country. Europe also gets more droughts, think Spain, Italy, even Germany (forest fires there as well); so either Europe or Australia - which would give us 2 from Global North and 2 from Global South. I am pondering over what image is good for "drought" and which is good for "water scarcity" in comparison. The former is simply the absence of rain (well, OK, I am thinking of the type called "Meteorological drought"). How do you show the absence of rain? By showing what it does to vegetation, ecosystems and farms. Whereas water scarcity is more about people and their access to water, right? Looking at the water scarcity article, the images used there are actually mostly maps and charts. More emphasis there is on topics around population growth, urbanisation, water used up by agriculture, access to water supply. But there is a little bit of overlap between the two articles (perhaps unavoidable). EMsmile (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: How about California, Somalia, South Australia, and Namibia? We would have to find an appropriate Somalia image if possible of course. Although Namibia and Somalia are technically on the same continent, they lie in entirely different regions and (primarily) different hemispheres that in spirit they could be on two different continents. I really don’t think Europe or South America is at the point to qualify for a lead picture at this time. And it is self-explanatory for Antarctica not to qualify as well. Castncoot (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think that Namibia would be relevant: A drought in a desert type arid country with low population density is not very exciting/important. A drought picture from India, Pakistan or China I would find more relevant. EMsmile (talk) 22:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, agreed. (The Namibia picture is already on the page, and that’s why I mentioned it. But I’m with you on that, which is why I didn’t propose the Atacama Desert in Chile.) Maybe this is what you were referring to:
Castncoot (talk) 01:23, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, the status quo of the page now is also acceptable. Castncoot (talk) 03:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think the collage would work out much better than just the one image from California. Have replaced the black and white image from India with an agricultural image from the U.S. for now:
File:Corn shows the affect of drought.jpg|Agricultural changes. Droughts, rising temperatures, and extreme weather negatively impact agriculture. Shown: Texas, US (2013)..
 EMsmile (talk) 09:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the ping, but I don't have the bandwidth to look at this :( Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 16:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe a collage of 6 images would work then. There are many images indeed worthy of representation and this should not become a competition between countries or regions for representation, for goodness sake. Castncoot (talk) 21:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

text:  Just to give readers an idea of the magnitude and intensity of the California meteorological megadrought:—the fact that this can occur in a developed country not only shocks the mind but should also be even more alarming vis-a-vis droughts in developing countries with poor infrastructure and fingerprints of corruption all over those droughts. Therein the essentiality of the placed image. Castncoot (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure if a collage of 6 would add more value than a collage of 4 because drought photos look rather similar all around the world, don't they? It's usually very dry soil or much smaller rivers and lakes than normal. But if you or someone prefers a collage of 6, OK (the article on city even has a collage of 9 by the way). Regarding California: personally I find a drought more worrisome and shocking when it results in loss of lives (like in East Africa). The drought in California might shock you more if you live in the United States but Wikipedia is written with a global audience in mind so I think we should be mindful of not projecting what we find most relevant onto everyone else. Readers from all over the world should feel included and addressed when reading Wikipedia articles. To date, many many Wikipedia articles are US centric or Europe centric simply because a majority of the Wikipedia volunteers currently come from those regions (this problem is well documented (see e.g. WP:BIAS). So we should make an extra effort to reduce that US and Euro centricity wherever we can (including with respect to images used), especially for topics that are global in nature, like droughts. EMsmile (talk) 21:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I respectfully disagree. Notability is notability, reliably sourced, regardless of where it originates, and that’s the only metric that counts for me. Let’s not open a Pandora's box here. Best, Castncoot (talk) 22:48, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, let's see if there are any other people who're watching this page who are keen to jump into the discussion. Either way, I have now replaced the one image in the lead with the collage of 4 images. I think it shows the varied impacts of drought quite well. The images and caption could now be fine-tuned further e.g. if anyone wants to replace one of the two images from the U.S. with an image from Asia. EMsmile (talk) 10:34, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Example collage for the lead

message: — Assignment last updated by VenusL (talk) 10:30, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

message: Cheers all, I noticed the bottom of this article links to "Drought" on Wiktionary (definition: "A surname") , when it should link to "drought" with a lower-case "d" (which is the topic of this Wikipedia article.) Compare for yourselves:
* wrong-but-currently-used: 
* correct-but-not-used: .
Best, Albertr (talk) 18:09, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've changed it. EMsmile (talk) 09:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiktionary link should go to lower-case "drought" 

message: If someone has time: it would be great if the section on consequences could be improved: I see a bit of repetition there between the paragraphs written in prose and those that are bullet point lists. This repetition needs to be removed. The text should mostly be prose; perhaps some specific examples could be in a bullet point list. EMsmile (talk) 09:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The section on consequences needs some work