Talk:Thunderstorm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Physics Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.
Help with this template Comments: edit – history – watch – refresh Wikipedia:WikiProject Meteorology: Current GA nominee. --Runningonbrains 14:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thunderstorm is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

	This article related to meteorology and/or specific weather events is part of WikiProject Meteorology and Weather Events, an attempt to standardize and improve all articles related to weather or meteorology. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at its talk page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance within WikiProject Meteorology.

A Wikipedian removed Thunderstorm from the good article list. There are suggestions below for improving areas to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, renominate the article as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review. Removal date: October 26, 2006

Contents 1 Pictures 2 Diagrams 3 Expansion request: Formation 4 Sources 5 Merge from Squall 6 GA Nomination 7 GA Review

[edit] Pictures

Really nice article, April. If I might suggest a picture or two, for someone who knows how to put them in (I'm at the end of a workday, else I might do it myself). All are public domain:

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/iwx/wxpics/clouds_sun/BerryLightning2.jpg

http://www.crh.noaa.gov/iwx/wxpics/clouds_sun/Berryshelf.jpg (this is a shelf cloud, 78 mph winds in the storm)

http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/historic/nws/wea00606.htm (Boston, 1967)

http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/nssl/nssl0013.htm

Just a few among many at the noaa site. Hmm, noticed that a couple of them are shown, and others aren't.. No clue why. rgamble

its sorta boring :( zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz* The two pictures above that are still available are illustrations of lightning, which might not be the best thunderstorm pictures. -- Beland 22:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Diagrams

It would be very helpful if there were some diagrams illustrating the airflow in each of the three different types of thunderstorm. -- Beland 22:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Seems to have been done - feel free to re-add {{reqdiagram}} if you think it needs more. SeventyThree^(Talk) 00:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion request: Formation

Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. This article has been tagged since January 2007.

How do weather fronts and tropical cyclones give rise to thunderstorms, structurally speaking? This is hinted at but not well explained. -- Beland 03:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

There's quite a lot of unverified facts in here, so I've added an unreferenced tag. Annihilatenow 11:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from Squall

Related but distinct. Keep Squall separate. --Kbh3^rdtalk 18:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Agree that these two are related but Squall should remain a discrete page. Right now Squall isn't very extensive, but it has serious potential for a large article. At that point, it will be obvious it doesn't need to be totally merged into Thunderstorm. JLamb 04:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

If the squall is integrated into the thunderstorm article, the other types of thunderstorms have to be too. There is already an article on the supercell. So either you explain every type of thunderstorms in one article, which could be huge, OR you leave separate article like now. Pierre cb 11:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Nomination

I am placing the GA nomination of this article on hold for 7 days for some rewriting of the introduction to better conform with WP:LEAD. I would recomend splitting off some of the information about thunderstorm activity in specific locations into a new section and possible trim some of the U.S. centric stuff. Wikipedia is a worldwide not just American encyclopedia. Otherwise it looks good. The referencing is a little light-specific facts and assertions should have in-line citations-but not enough to fail the article. Eluchil404 23:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I just rewrote the lead somewhat and took out the US-centric stuff. CrazyC83 02:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick responce. I am now passing the article through to GA as it looks to meet all the criteria. Eluchil404 23:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

The Good Article review for this article has ended, and counting the person who first passed it, it was one person for being a GA, and three opposed, therefore, I have delisted this article. Main concern was an overall lack of broadness, though especially in the thunderstorm detection section. Review archived here: Wikipedia:Good articles/Disputes/Archive 7 Homestarmy 18:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)