Talk:Cape Wind

message: I looked at the pictures on the Cape Wind web site.  It is more of an eye sore than I thought it would be.  I thought the wind mills would be so far off that noone would be bothered, like the view from Martha's Vineyard.  But the people on Cape Cod will have kind of an industrial looking view out at sea.  It's not quite as benign as I imagined.  Not a reason to kill the project outright.  But it is more of a factor than I thought it would be. 24.225.177.164 23:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are visible, but whether they are an eyesore depends on ones point of view. I suspect many Cape residents seeing an oil tanker pass by in the distance consider it picturesque, yet they represent a technology that many feel is damaging the planet. Also see windmill for photos of wind power installations that locals consider cultural treasures. --agr 16:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Take a look at the list of references at the bottom of the Cape Wind article for more information.  Abe Froman 19:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's not exactly jumping out at me.  Let's see if I get this right... The project originated with Cape Wind Associates, who proposed this site from the beginning.  Alternative sites were discussed in the environmental impact statement, at least partially in response to public feedback. These were dismissed for a number of reasons (some involving "unexploded ordinance" - yikes!).  Is that roughly correct?  Is there any more information on how Cape Wind Associates came to propose the site in the first place?  There's one blurb at their site that says "why this is the ideal spot", but I don't see any direct comparisons to other sites. Cirejcon 00:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good question.  Cape Wind appears to be the first entity to propose the project.  But someone had to think of it, first.  Perhaps we could find a citation and information on the genesis of Cape Wind and improve the article with the information?  Abe Froman 03:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: If you look at the US wind map in the Wind power article, :Image:US wind power map.gif, the offshore area around Massachusetts almost leaps out at you. Couple that with the obvious advantages of shallow water and proximity to an electricity market with high prices and it's not hard to see why developers consider this site ideal.--agr 11:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: : The Argus picture is superfluous to what is being discussed.  And alarming.  Since it happened 30 years ago, and it is not at all clear whether a wind farm would have made any difference in the Argus ramming a stationary island, I do not think the picture should be included.  Abe Froman 22:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What I think is that wind power projects help us use less oil for power generation which means less tankers passing and less chances of spill like this one occurring. Besides the oil spill shows that the area is not the "pristine environment" some people claim it is. I agree the text under it was inappropriate though. Probably something like: "On December 15, 1976 the oil tanker Argo Merchant sank northwest of Nantucket spilling 7.7 million gallons of oil. It is believed that renewable energy projects like Cape wind will reduce the chance of catastrophic oil spills occurring." --cassini83 23:22, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's a stretch.  The sinking ship image does not lend a pleasant atmosphere to the article, which is about wind power.  The 30 year old Argus beaching does not have anything to do with the Cape project.  The shipping channel information is already n the article.  Let's leave it at that.  Abe Froman 00:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK. I just needed someone else's opinion that's all :-) --cassini83 00:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sinking Ship Picture

message: There are several Mass. opponents, including Sen. Kennedy.  Why is Young's photo in the article? --rogerd 02:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can add the other politicians.   Highlighting the fact that the single congressman and the senior senator from Alaska are proposing legislation specific to a Massachussetts energy project is germane.  Abe Froman 03:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It smells like POV and advocacy to me.  It seems like the editor who included that photo is trying make a point about congressmen from other parts of the country opposing the project.  I think that mentioning his opposition is sufficent, but the photo is overkill.  --rogerd 03:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, no need to have Young's picture in here. Why not add Robert and Ted Kennedy's pictures too? How about Romney's? Best to have none. $2 pistol 12:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I included Young's picture but I agree that it looks out of place now. You can go agead and delete it. --cassini83 14:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the purpose of having Don Young's photo in the article? 

message: I didn't "mass delete" anything, I brought the text up to date. Don Young's proposal is no longer what's in the bill; a compromise has been struck, which my edits described. I did remove some redundancies, of course.  (We don't need to mention twice that the governor can nix it.) I'd be glad to discuss any specific objections you have to my changes, but my version is more accurate and, I think, written better. $2 pistol 12:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My edits 

message: In the external links section, the link to the capecodonline poll showing 80% approval is dead (I marked this as such on the main page, I am new, however, and unsure whether this was the correct action (tried to follow the Wikipedia:Cite_sources page).  I could not find the page on archive.org or google cache, and some quick googling showed different results  .  I did not remove the link, as it did not seem to follow guidelines - is anyone able to find a working link to the poll mentioned? --Xul 03:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links Section

message: Article needs some serious cleanup to be in compliance with WP:NPOV and WP:ATT.  Some examples:
*"...focus on its ability to displace oil and gas consumption with clean, locally produced energy as well as the project being the best option for much needed new generating capacity."
*"One of the reasons supporters like this project has to do with the potential for less oil to be used or shipped to the Cape Cod power plant."
Tag applied.  /Blaxthos 22:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Those summaries come from Reliable Sources, so I am not sure what WP:NPOV has to do with them.  Was their content mis-reported?  Abe Froman 22:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Making a characterization of "best option" is a subjective judgement -- a business wikipedia should avoid.  A more neutral version would read something like "so and so believes that the project is the best option".  These are just examples.  Unfortunately, I don't have the time to dedicate to cleaning it up; I hope that my comments help.  /Blaxthos 04:12, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraph was about arguments by supporters, but I've edited it to make that clearer. I also took out a sentence that was garbled and, if it meant what I think, that this is the largest singe global warming reduction project in the US, is questionable.--agr 12:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The largest single existing global warming reduction project in the US is the Grand Coulee Dam, which by itself produced about half as much renewable electricity in 2008 as all wind farms in the US combined. Cape Wind will not even be the largest US wind farm when complete. However, Cape Wind may be the largest new global warming reduction project in Massachusetts for some time. --Teratornis (talk) 02:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Oppose merge. I don't see the need to merge Cape Wind Associates with this article. In fact, I think it would confuse things. Johnfos (talk) 02:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge

message: In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) 
* "sur" :
** Survey: Leadership on Cape Wind, Other Clean Energy Solutions to Global Warming Seen as Path to New 'Massachusetts Miracle'
** 
DumZiBoT (talk) 17:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot report : Found duplicate references ! 

message: Here is a location map template showing where Cape Wind will be. It may be possible to use the same template method to put a location marker onto the map in :File:Massachusetts wind resource map 50m 800.jpg. Or the location map can go into the article in addition to the wind resource map. Comments? --Teratornis (talk) 07:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Later I learned that  can go in the extra field of , so I added one to the article. --Teratornis (talk) 02:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Locator map 

message: I rolled back these contributions by a new user. The edits violated WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:NOR. --Teratornis (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion piece reverted 

message: I've edited the recent addition of the results of a Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce poll to reflect what the cited sources say. The Chamber polled its members, not the general public.  Also note that press releases are not considered WP:reliable sources. If you want to include the Herald poll or the claim the electric rtes would double, you will need sources for those statements, not a press release. Also note the article already points out that the ballot questions were in towns not on the Cape. Repeating that is arguing a position. --agr (talk) 17:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:reliable sources are one of the foundations of encyclopedias like Wikipedia. Supply those, and they may be considered for content. The controversy section of this article is already much bigger than in similar articles. TGCP (talk) 22:08, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce poll 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Cape Wind's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "USowStrategy":
From List of offshore wind farms in the United States: A national offshore wind strategy: Creating an offshore wind energy industry in the United States page iii U.S. Department of Energy, 7 February 2011. Accessed: 8 February 2011. "no wind turbines are installed in U.S. waters"
From Wind power in the United States: A national offshore wind strategy: Creating an offshore wind energy industry in the United States page iii U.S. Department of Energy, February 7, 2011. Accessed: February 8, 2011. "no wind turbines are installed in U.S. waters"
From Atlantic Wind Connection: A national offshore wind strategy: Creating an offshore wind energy industry in the United States page 33 U.S. Department of Energy, 7 February 2011. Accessed: 8 February 2011.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Cape Wind]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cape Wind. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100626054446/http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eoeeasubtopic&L=3&L0=Home&L1=Energy%2c+Utilities+%26+Clean+Technologies&L2=Energy+Facilities+Siting+Board&sid=Eoeea to http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eoeeasubtopic&L=3&L0=Home&L1=Energy%2C+Utilities+%26+Clean+Technologies&L2=Energy+Facilities+Siting+Board&sid=Eoeea
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121103181910/http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/greenblog/2011/07/wampanoag_tribe_sues_over_cape.html to http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/green/greenblog/2011/07/wampanoag_tribe_sues_over_cape.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110106041251/http://org2.democracyinaction.org:80/o/6891/content_item/aboutus to http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6891/content_item/aboutus
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110430190430/http://org2.democracyinaction.org:80/o/6891/content_item/threats-view to http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6891/content_item/threats-view
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:04, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cape Wind. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100401111025/http://www.mirant.com:80/our_business/where_we_work/canal.htm to http://www.mirant.com/our_business/where_we_work/canal.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121017060039/http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2007/11/cape_wind_appea.html to http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2007/11/cape_wind_appea.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150427011434/http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2012/08/15/faa-rules-cape-wind-project-poses-hazard-planes/wrds6gRVgtGkk7HlekpZ4O/story.html to http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2012/08/15/faa-rules-cape-wind-project-poses-hazard-planes/wrds6gRVgtGkk7HlekpZ4O/story.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091221054030/http://www.saveoursound.org:80/site/PageServer?pagename=NantucketSound_TheSound to http://www.saveoursound.org/site/PageServer?pagename=NantucketSound_TheSound
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150427031341/http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2012/08/03/senator_scott_brown_and_elizabeth_warren_clash_over_their_environmental_views/?page=full to http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2012/08/03/senator_scott_brown_and_elizabeth_warren_clash_over_their_environmental_views/?page=full
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cape Wind. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090209060246/http://www.boston.com:80/news/local/breaking_news/2007/11/cape_wind_appea.html to http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2007/11/cape_wind_appea.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120817022852/http://www.boston.com:80/metrodesk/2012/08/15/faa-rules-cape-wind-project-poses-hazard-planes/wrds6gRVgtGkk7HlekpZ4O/story.html to http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2012/08/15/faa-rules-cape-wind-project-poses-hazard-planes/wrds6gRVgtGkk7HlekpZ4O/story.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140521162213/http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2012/08/03/senator_scott_brown_and_elizabeth_warren_clash_over_their_environmental_views/?page=full to http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2012/08/03/senator_scott_brown_and_elizabeth_warren_clash_over_their_environmental_views/?page=full
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:38, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Cape Wind. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.capewind.org/FAQ-Category4-Cape%2BWind%2BBasics-Parent0-myfaq-yes.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060923071101/http://www.masstech.org/offshore/Meeting2/presentationsalamone1031.pdf to http://www.masstech.org/offshore/Meeting2/presentationsalamone1031.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.capewind.org/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eoeeasubtopic&L=3&L0=Home&L1=Energy%2C%20Utilities%20&%20Clean%20Technologies&L2=Energy%20Facilities%20Siting%20Board&sid=Eoeea
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20090522%2FNEWS%2F90522009
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20101123%2FNEWS%2F11230310%2F1018%2FOPINION
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.neratepayers.org/support-for-cape-wind-project-has-collapsed-since-2007
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:53, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified