Talk:Climate of Minnesota/Archive 2

message: I've been putting together a lot of info to expand this article.  How does this look?  I haven't done any of the formatting or references yet, but would like to get an idea of the layout and detail of this.  The only major thing I have not done yet would be to add temperature and precipitation tables for a few cities across the state.  Since I haven't checked up on everything yet I'm sure the deails aren't 100% accurate at this time, but I'll work on that.  Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gopher backer (talk • contribs) 
:*I like it.  good job.  I hope you don't mind - I went through it and made a few changes: spelling, broken links, added some useful links, and improved some awkward wording.  Still to be done: Hail should be mentioned, growing season variations by location, keep the snow-bound train picture, citations - the format I like to use for online sources is   Fill in as much information as you can find; rarely is it all available.  Subsequent uses of the same source are simply   Appraiser 20:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Article proposal

message: Expand Floods section a little 
 * Change "Like a lot of states" to something else, or expand somehow in Floods section
 * when did the other floods occur? Change to overview then example?
* Add another picture or two (in the lower half of the article)
* summer -> "...high and low temperatures..." should that be ".. daily high..."?
* Have an example of "Northern Minnesota is considerably cooler and less humid than southern Minnesota is during the summer months." ?
* backup "a frequent summer occurrence" with example? "one ever N days" ..." "N times a month"
** It does list a figure (30-40 times per year) in the into section of Summer.  Is that good enough?
 * list tornado outbreak examples in date order (oldest first?)
* Add references where there is the 
* Expand lead section
** Note, try this: Copy entire article to somewhere like User:Gopher backer/sandbox and start ripping material out of the article until only the most important sentences are left. Condense and re-write these as the introduction. 
***Thanks, that worked well.  How does the intro look now?  Do I need to re-reference everything if that's already done farther down in the aricle?
****Nope, there shouldn't be any refs in the intro since the intro is just a summary of stuff described in more detail below. I'll take a look at the intro now... -Ravedave (help name my baby) 16:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: To-do list

message: Any ideas on these?  I tried to fit them in as best I could, but I'm not sure how good it looks, I just kind of made up the formatting since there does seem to be any pre-made templates for Climate of States (though there are some for climate for cities, but those won't work here...).  I also have matching tables for celcius & centimeters but didn't know where to put these in.  Would we want to put the tables in, just put those values in () next to the existing values or just leave it as is?  As for the cities, I tried to pick cities that were spread across the state, if there should be more of less let me know that as well. Gopher backer 04:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tables look pretty good, I think they fit in nicely. I would put the celcius figures next to the F ones as in the reference I added to the last table. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 05:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Temp & Precip tables

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 8 cm, use 8 cm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 8 cm.nbsp
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km2, and pounds -> lb.
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.linkdate
*As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use th; for example, instead of using January 30th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.
*As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space inbetween. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.copyedit
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Ravedave (help name my baby) 01:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto Peer Review 

message: I picked up a few Minnesota books from the library the other week and yesterday I remembered one was on climate. Here are the interesting things from it and a ref. 
* Quote on the back cover, might be usefull "Whats the adage in Minnesota? If you don't like the weather, wait a few minutes, it'll change? Mark seely brings us ..." - Cathy Wurzer
** might be usefull in spring/fall sections?
***  I actually considered adding this statement, but when I did a Google search on that phrase I found that a lot of states/regions say the same thing about their weather. So while it may be true Minnesota more than other states, I wasn't sure if I should add it.  http://www.google.com/search?q=don%27t+like+the+weather+wait+a+few+minutes&hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2006-40,GGLD:en&start=10&sa=N  Gopher backer 19:26, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff to add? 

message: I have submitted this article for peer review since GA seems to be clogged with hurricanes, and this is a long article which WP:GA recommends sending to peer review. I haven't removed the article from GA, but that can be done if anyone wants to.-Ravedave (help name my baby) 06:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer review

message: Should this be placed on in this article?  Gopher backer 16:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say, "yes".  Appraiser 16:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  { {Minnesota} } 

message: I rearranged things a little bit to see if I could fit the train picture in the main body.  However, I didn’t mind the train picture in the intro at all, so if we want to move it back there go right ahead.  Even if that happens I think I like the end result of the other changes I made with the images and charts  So in that case I’d try to find another picture to go where the train is right now.  Gopher backer 18:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Like your placement. I just stuck it in there because I was in a hurry. The train pic is good and should stay in, I just didn't know where to put it. -Ravedave (help name my baby) 19:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like having a photo on the first screen - to grab attention.  I found a nice shot of Loring park for the Spring section.  Nice graph, Ravedave.  This article's looking good. Appraiser 21:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Train Picture 

message: Could you get another picture of that tornado, without the road sign?  It's very distracting.  (kidding)  Appraiser 20:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tornado

message: Very good. Suggest breaking lead into 4-5 paras and making it more of a summary--it seems too facty to me. Very little is said of Autumn in the lead and it seems short in the text compared to other seasons. The PR script is below for more tips:
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
*Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.
*Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, recently might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 1 miles, use 1 miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 1 miles.
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km2, and pounds -> lb.
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.
*This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Rlevse 11:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA status

message: Well the peer review closed with no feedback. Should we try and clear up the auto-suggestions and then nominate for FA? -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 22:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought we'd taken care of most of that, but I'll go through it again when I can to see if I can find any mistakes.  Question about the lead section though...  Does that really need to be made longer?  The lead section on this one is longer on than it is for Minnesota, and Minnesota is a much longer article.  I thought this one was pretty thorough.Gopher backer 16:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think that the above comments suggest that it be split into more paragraphs, be made less facty and maybe even shortened a bit. -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 20:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review closed 

message: * I re-wrote the fall section.  Opinions? 
* Should we standardize the captions on the photos?  Putting towns in all of them, what do we wikilink, etc.
* Any other suggestions?  Besides these two things I'm pretty comfortable with it. Gopher backer 19:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the fall section, a succinct section for a boring season. It already went through PR without any feedback so I say go for it! -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 01:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated to-do list 

message: I started to install the articlehistory template, and lost a lot of time trying to figure out why the oldid on GA is wrong here - if anyone can sort it out, that would be great.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind - found by Circeus and fixed.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA oldid