Talk:Geography and climate of Winnipeg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Wiki of this article 2 Fixed Article 3 Climatological Graph 4 September 2007

[edit] Wiki of this article

I am trying to get this article wikified. Any help would be great. jdobbin 15:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The first things that stick out to me (besides a lack of references) is the lack of wikilinks, a lack of subsections, and the lack of an introduction (see WP:LEAD). I don't think I'm that good at writing introductions, but I could do some other things. Ufwuct 01:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

This article was once part of the main Winnipeg article, but yes, it likely could use an introduction of its own. Otherwise it is very well written and the only source for the weather stats is Environment Canada, so I'm not sure why there is concern for a lack of sources.

One issue I have: the article ventures into political territory (intro 2nd para). This isn't appropriate for a Geography and Climate article. R2richar 01:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fixed Article

There could still be some improvements in this article but it is beginning to take shape. Any help would be great. Thanks. jdobbin 18:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Climatological Graph

I updated it. Please see Talk:Winnipeg#Climate Graph. vid 21:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] September 2007

This article was in rough shape. I've started some basic cleanup to remove a lot of the unnecessary adjectives and some material which is not relevant or appropriate for this article. I don't have time yet to deal with sources, but I am concerned that some of the info may be copied directly from other sources. There are a lot of highly specific statements without any inline citations. This topic is not in my area of interest but I'll put it on the To Do list. -- Taroaldo 07:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I did a quick Google search of some sentences and found only results linking to Wikipedia or other sites that have quoted this article, so it is unlikely (but not impossible) that it was copied from another source. vid 12:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

WHO WOULD THE SOURCES BE??? The article WAS very well written until someone came along and butchered it. Did you think that maybe the editor who wrote the article might actually know something about the subject and is not just some flake who can't think beyond inserting someone else's work and then providing a source. Wikipedia is losing all credibility as of late anyways...so who really cares. --206.45.149.61 (talk) 05:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)