Talk:Climate of Minnesota

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star Climate of Minnesota is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.


WikiProject Minnesota This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, which aims to improve all articles related to Minnesota.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of Top-importance within Minnesota articles.

This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Meteorology
 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.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Meteorology.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Gopher backer
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
  1. Revamp Preview
  2. November 2006 - January 2007

Contents

[edit] In popular culture

I had someone review this section and they agreed with one of the comments on film, and their suggestion was that Grumpy Old Men and Fargo be mentioned in this section. I threw something together quick, but I'm definitely not a film expert, so if anyone is and can run with something like this please do:

"Minnesota's winters have also been noticed by Hollywood. The 1993 film Grumpy Old Men is set in Wabasha, Minnesota during the winter season. Winter activities such as ice fishing are main themes of the film. The 1996 movie Fargo also features the backdrop of a Minnesota winter, but in this instance it was a much more bleak portrait. Several scenes in the film portray the Minnesota winter as barren and descolate, with ever present cold temperatures, and snow blown, white out landscapes." Gopher backer 16:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I put something similar in the article. (Everyone) feel free to work on it some more. --Appraiser 16:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Same here. Kablammo 17:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Culture of Minnesota

I have created Culture of Minnesota and stole the paragraph from here because it was getting too big. I Added a main article link as well. Can someone trim down the section here? -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 18:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FA status

Congratulations to those who have brought this to FA status so soon after its creation. It is an impressive and well-researched body of work.

I believe that some sections could still benefit from a copyedit and some tightening. I will do that, on a section-by-section basis, so that changes anyone disagrees with my changes can more easily revert them. Kablammo 01:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

A thanks to those who helped out on the In popular culture section. It was thrown together at a moment's notice and I think it really rounded out the article nicely. Gopher backer 03:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Glad to help out. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 19:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article of theDay

Anyone want to add this to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests? A solstice or equinox would be good days. -Ravedave (Adopt a State) 04:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I've pecked at this a little more over the last couple months, trying to sharpen it up more for a front page appearance. However after looking at the reuest page, I'm a little confused. Can there really only be 5 requests open at once? Gopher backer (talk) 04:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is the Train actually stuck?

I found something in the MHS photo archive, here is the caption:

Southern Minnesota Division, Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul passenger train coming through a snow cut near Sherburne.'

Here's the link

They don't actually show the picture, but it looks like the same thing. Gopher backer 16:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image questions

I added an image I found from the Lake Superior article into the Lake Superior section on this article. Does that work? Also, a friend of mine has a great, unique picture of a rainbow that he took from right outside his house that I'd like to fit in here too. I'm wondering if I should put this in the In Popular Culture section, or not becuase it doesn't really fit the theme of that section? If we don't put it there, does anyone have a good idea for an image for that section? Would it be possible to get a screenshot of a barren snow covered landscape from Fargo? (I'm not familiar at all with the rules surrounding movie screenshots) Gopher backer 02:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The photo is pretty good, but there might be something better on flickr. There are 2000+ images when I searched for CC by SA images with "lake superior" [1]. I think an ice fishing picture would be good for the pop culture section. Again there are lots on flicker [2], this one is esp cool[3]. If you want help uploading pics from flickr drop me a note. The Fargo pic would be cool but it may not meet the fair use rules, and a free pic is probably more in the wikipedia spirit. -Ravedave 03:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spring flooding

Should the flooding section make a note about ice dams (aka ice jams), they seem to have caused problems this year. It looks like the ice dam article needs work too... -Ravedave 03:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I added it in. Gopher backer 16:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arctic

I don't think arctic should be capitalized. What's the rationale?--Appraiser 01:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I just checked Wiktionary.[4] As a noun, Arctic is capitalized; as an adjective it's not.--Appraiser 02:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
So the article needs mixed case, maybe(?). Air from the Arctic is "Arctic air", but air that is cold is "arctic air".[5] I believe all uses of "arctic" should be removed, and possibly some of the "Arctic" ones as well. "Polar" is used in the article in conjunction, perhaps a switch over to that might be better. -Ravedave 04:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll defer on the capitalization since I have no idea, but there is a difference between Polar & Arctic air masses. Polar air is generally considered the air that is in Minnesota most most of the fall through the early spring, while Artic air is much colder, well below zero. Arctic air is the coldest air we get here and usually only occurs from Dec - March. [6] Gopher backer 04:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Missing Topics?

Should Straight-line winds and Derechos be mentioned in the article? The Boundary Waters-Canadian Derecho made wikipedia's List of derecho events -Ravedave 14:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't use the specific term of straigt line winds (we could change it to do so), but these are addressed in the summer precipitation section. Gopher backer 17:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Apparently I misspelled derecho when I did a find on the article. I added a link to straight line winds. I think thats good enough. -Ravedave 17:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge proposal

Should Minnesota weather extremes be merged into this article? --Cyclopia 22:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

  • While this article overlaps the subsidiary page, the latter has a level of detail, including lists and charts, that would occupy too much space on the more general climate article. (Given the information now on the weather extremes article, perhaps the last section of the climate article, a table of weather extremes, could be removed.) As Climate of Minnesota made it to FA it might be best not to clutter it up. Kablammo 00:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Ditto, Climate of Minnesota is long enough already. -Ravedave 01:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't this mean that maybe we are including too much information? Do we need a full length article about all the climate extremes of every USA state? Moreover, this actual article is highly redundant. It is full of sentences like: Snow is the main form of winter precipitation, but freezing rain, ice, sleet, and sometimes even rain are all possible during the winter months. (repeated two times, really not informative -this is typical of most northern climates) ; As with many other Midwestern states, winter in Minnesota is characterized by cold (below freezing) temperatures and snowfall. (really not informative as per above) ; Spring is a time of major transition in Minnesota. As winter nears its end, the sun rises higher in the sky and temperatures begin to moderate. (useless at best) and so on. The whole article looks like it can be packed into a bit more than half its length without losing significant information. Such an article should focus on weather patterns unique of Minnesota or of some importance, IMHO, to be of real encyclopedic value. --Cyclopia 08:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Minnesota weather patterns do not need to be unique to be encyclopedic. An article is "full-length" if it says what it needs to say, and no more. The weather extremes article could use some copyediting. Perhaps we should do that first and see how long it is then. Kablammo 11:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Here's my suggestion. The way I look at it, and this was already mentioned, if you combined the information from Minnesota weather extremes into Climate of Minnesota, and then put Climate of Minnesota through the FA process again, it would likely be opposed for being too long. IMO it would be suggested for that particular section to be split off into a different article, since the detail contained in it is more than is needed for Climate of Minnesota. So perhaps what we can do to eliminate the redundancy is to get rid of the prose, and rename Minnesota weather extremes something like List of Minnesota weather records so it would be considered a list rather than an article. It could contain just a brief intro and then only the weather records. We can then elimate the Minnesota weather extremes section from this article, then maybe just link the new List of Minnesota weather records as a See also under the General climatology section.

As far as if that information is actually needed, I think it's legit material. Look at List of Delaware hurricanes; that has been recognized as a Featured List so I think there is a place for stuff like this. Gopher backer 14:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
That makes a lot of sense. And in addition to the see also, we could also in-line link within the climate article itself. With subdivisions of the list, we could hyperlink directly from the appropriate places in the climate article to the relevant table. (Example: a main article sentence sentence about temperature extremes could read State record temperatures range from -60 in the northeast to 114 in the west.) We preserve the FA main article, don't clutter it up with a bunch of lists, but those interested in digging deeper can jump directly to the information they want. Kablammo 15:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and made the changes that I suggested. Does that work? Can we remove the Merge tags? Gopher backer 20:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bow Echo

Is it worth adding in Bow echoes? It seems like they have been occurring a lot lately. -Ravedave 03:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, I added something. Gopher backer 15:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I've been thinking.....

Something that has never quite felt right was things like tornadoes or blizzards ended up under a specific season, even though they occur in three different seasons. I did a little redesign. I don't think I added any content, just moved it around. What does everyone think? User:Gopher backer/sandbox3. Gopher backer 05:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] on the 45th parallel

I removed this edit, though it is an interesting fact it appeared to me to make the sentence state something that isn't true. Just because you're on the 45th parallel doesn't mean you'll automatically have a continental climate. What makes that so for us is that we are landlocked by 1000 miles on all sides. Similarly, there are also many areas that have a continental climate that are nowhere near the 45th parallel. Gopher backer 19:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Minnesota's not landlocked to the northeast, or you wouldn't get lake effect snows in the arrowhead. =) Thegreatdr (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Ice Box

I am From Duluth Minnesota and live there 23 years of my life , and Tower Minnesota is not the Ice Box but International Falls is . I am going to change it if no one else will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.19.92 (talk) 05:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll see if I can re-write that to make more sense. I think that what is there now could be intrepreted as being correct, since, as the reference for that statement points out there is a gray area surrounding the "Icebox of the nation" term. After looking at that more, I think that it should be pointed out that International Falls is the coldest official reporting station in the lower 48, while Tower is the coldest of the smaller reporting stations. Gopher backer 15:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)