Talk:Bureau of Meteorology

message: is this article titled "Bureau of Meteorology (Australia"? As far as I can see it is the only one. I mean we don't call "Federal Bureau of Investigation" "Federal Bureau of Investigation (United States)" or "Met Office" "Met Office (United Kingdom) do we? Silent Billy (talk) 21:13, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is named that way because of the guidelines in Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Guidelines for government departments, agencies, and officials. However, here is the guideline as it was at the time of the page move in 2006, and Neutrality has recently rewritten it and added a clause saying that there's no need to add the country name in the title if the organisation's name is unique or a primary topic. I happen to agree with this assessment, and it's the way things are in practice on Wikipedia. Therefore, I will move the page back to the title "Bureau of Meteorology" in three days if there are no objections on this talk page. Graham87 01:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Graham87 14:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the suggestion, but that is completely non-standard in Wikipedia – compare the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, which is almost always known as CSIRO. Graham87 10:31, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why 

message: Getting a few Wikipedians who say it is BoM. Right now the article reads BOM. So which is right? Also I would like to know how 'BOM' came onto this page in the first place.--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 22:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: See my response at the place where you had this discussion per your contribs, Talk:2020–21 Australian region cyclone season#BoM or BOM. Graham87 06:23, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No idea which is right? I'm adding a discussion here to attract more discussion if more people are only watching this page...--CyclonicallyDeranged (talk) 08:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  BOM or BoM 

message: @Graham87 Per WP:MOSLEAD: "The lead should ...  summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies." This is quite a significant controversy, so it should be included in the lead. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: A far more widely cited part of the lead section guideline is "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." ... "Apart from basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article." The importance of a part of the article is not determined by your personal opinion, but how it is covered in reliable sources; apart from the Michael West reference, I can't find any evidence of coverage of this controversy anywhere that could vaguely be considered reliable by Wikipedia ... not even the ABC. Graham87 02:47, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite the lack of coverage, Michael West Media is still respected as a collection of independent journalists. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 03:07, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ... Which is why I moved the text without getting rid of it outright. Graham87 09:25, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  BOM Influenced by O&G 

message: Hello everyone! It would be great that we get the number of weather stations that manages the Bureau of Meteorology, to add to this article. Regards. 186.132.232.94 (talk) 23:02, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: That would require constant updating and be much more trouble than it's worth, in my opinion. The Bureau of Meteorology already provides dynamically updated lists like this. Graham87 03:00, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: A similar question was posted at Talk:Météo-France. Graham87 03:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of weather stations