Talk:Cumulonimbus cloud

message: The body of this article (maybe under "Appearance" section) should link to Cumulonimbus incus. Not quite sure what the relationship is, so won't do it myself. Stevage 08:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Incus

message: "Thunderstorms and other bad weather..." Calling thunderstorms "bad" – POV? In an article about clouds? Am I being ridiculous? Or just a little cumulonimbus... Morganfitzp 02:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Severe weather is a better term, I think. --Xenonoxide (talk) 05:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I don't think a radar display was the intent of the "green or even purple" description - any color scale can be mapped to altitude, so a radar can display a cloud as any color you choose.  I believe it referred to the actual appearance of the cloud to the naked eye. Khakiandmauve (talk) 19:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Appearance

message: I am a meteorologist and member of the American Meteorological Society and can tell you lightning (as just light and therefore incapable of doing such) does not cause thunder, but rather the actual movement of heated air from around the bolt; therefore the opening sentence here is incorrect.  I will not change it, however, since a Wiki 'editor' will simply revert it, despite having no experience or expertise in the subject. 207.38.128.167 (talk) 05:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lightning does not create thunder as a sound 

message: Why is it Cumulonimbus cloud, and not just plain Cumulonimbus? Nimbus is cloud, after all, why this repetition?--Mátyás (talk) 08:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of article 

message: Some radical thoughts....
The classic description of cumulonimbus clouds is to say that they are anvil like or anvil shaped. But what is an anvil? I know, but I'm old. The high school kids I teach have no idea.
The value of saying that something looks like something else comes from the something else being a common object that makes the description obvious. It no longer works with anvils.
Is there a better way?
HiLo48 (talk) 08:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently not, he says, noting the total absence of a response in 7 months  HiLo48 (talk) 20:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's say you ask your high school students if the shape looks like anything they're familiar with.  Then get one of them to publish something reliable that makes the comparison, so we can use it as a source.  At that point, we'll have to write into the article that they're called "anvil clouds" because they look like anvils, which have a similar shape to X.  I think a better solution is to add a picture of an anvil to the article.  What do you think of that? Khakiandmauve (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if someone says Anvils look like something else, until their is a general consensus that new verbiage is being used, it cannot be included in wikipedia.  Look up the guidelines for this encyclopedia for details.  Thegreatdr (talk) 16:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anvils are obsolete 

message: The Latin word for rain in "pluvia." 
Nimbus is Latin for "cloud."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.8.27.246 (talk) 20:28, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nimbus is not the Latin Word for Rain 

message: The section on cloud types doesn't mention cumulonimbus clouds at all. Why is it there? Citytownhome (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cloud types section not needed 

message: Does it bother anyone else that the distance measures are written in such a way to suggest that the metric and imperial measures are equivalent? For example, there are multiple points in this article where distance units are given as "kilometres (miles)" and "metres (yards)". Gin and Monotonic (talk) 15:35, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's a little odd. In the four places it's used, t's not referring to precise numbers, so technically there is no formal problem, but it reads like sloppy writing to me. My preference, given that it's a scientific topic, would be to omit the miles reference entirely. HiLo48 (talk) 00:37, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

text: The smattering of different units throughout is rather odd. Frankly just put the metric units and be done with it. Azoriusmage (talk) 16:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distance Measure Concerns