Talk:Climate of Florida

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Climate of Florida article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Climate of Florida has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 10, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
April 2, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 5, 2007.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the climate of Florida includes snowfall or sleet as early as November (in 2006) and as late as April (in 2007)?

Current status: Good article

Florida Top‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Tropical / Climate Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Climate task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Creation of the page/close to GA?

A graph and a couple images have now been added, so there should be enough graphics for the article. Can anyone else find other obvious problems which would prevent GA? Thegreatdr 21:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks at least close to GA-worthy to me, although it would probably be good to add celsius figures to the fahrenheit as well. I would really like to see more information; it's a little thin in really grasping the overall climate of Florida, but as it stands I think it's pretty good. bob rulz 04:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could always look up and see if there are references concerning winter/spring fog along the west and northeast coast as well as the July dust across the south. What more would you like to see, in addition to those topics? Thegreatdr 12:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really understand this sentence: "During the transition seasons, fronts regularly sweep through the state from October through May, which keeps conditions dry, particularly over the peninsula. " It seems like either a run-on or a mix of two sentences that somehow got merged. -Running On Brains 17:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed that. Removed the transition seasons portion and start the sentence with "Between October and May..." Thegreatdr 18:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fog blurb has also been added. Thegreatdr 19:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A paragraph on African dust has now been added. What else is missing and/or in need of expansion? Thegreatdr 18:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
It is stable.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
Overall:
a Pass/Fail:

I think it should pass but I think the Afican Dust outbrakes section should be intergrated into the wind section.

It has been done. Thank you for the review. =) Thegreatdr 05:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Oscillation

(for the future. Nothing to do with GA). The article correctly takes La Nina and El Nino into consideration. However, we are all (local articles too) stuck (as the article is) by quoting average temperatures (for example) based on both phenomena since this condition was not known until the 21st century or so. IMO all new weather statistics should take both conditions into consideration so that temperatures and rainfall are given for each phenomenon separately. Comparing this years temperatures with last is silly in view of our new knowledge. Okay for your local newscaster ("Wow! Ain't it awful?"), but not so good for an encyclopedia. As I write this, we are in a La Nina cycle. Temperatures and rainfall should be compared against La Ninas in the past, not against averages or El Ninos. Student7 (talk) 16:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Snowfall

I readded the earliest and latest occurrences of snow within the article. By earliest, I mean the earliest in the fall season and by latest, the latest in the spring season. Should we be keeping track of the latest occurrence of any weather event in this article, or just the general climatology? I'm advocating for climatology, due to the name of the article. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found this document which may be interesting to include in this article. Gamweb (talk) 06:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps Review: Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have added an article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 05:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who has seen the wind?

While I agree with what has been said about tornados being "weak," it really a) needs a reference, b) needs something a little clearer for weather experts. I suspect F0 and F1 for "usual" tornados, but higher ones for spin-offs from hurricanes, c) while I don't want to play chamber of commerce here, mention of tornados to people living where they don't experience any or many is like saying "a little earthquake" or a "little" nuclear explosion. It tends to create a "little" hysteria. I don't know how to circumvent that. I guess we tell it like it is (pretty much the way it is now). Student7 (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wet and dry seasons

I believe these seasons are tropical not temperate climates and should not be in here. The preferred tropical name, anyway, for the so-called "dry" season (when it rains less) is the "windy" season, because the wind is noticeably higher. (I lived in the tropics for two years). Student7 (talk) 01:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon has a wet season, so no, places with wet seasons do not need to be tropical climates. See the wet season article for details. Even so, the climate of Florida is subtropical. Thegreatdr (talk) 03:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

South FL has a tropical climate

Double reference

An editor asked me if I wanted the gray skies from dust from Africa in the lead double referenced since it was referenced in the article (below the lead). I guess my thought is yes, since it is peculiar. Is there some wikipolicy that prevents citations in the lead? I don't think there is. Some people never get any further than the lead. (If it were up to me I'd have every sentence or paragraph footnoted). Excluding vandalism, 30-50% of our problems and discussions are mostly due to inadequate footnoting IMO. Student7 (talk) 12:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rule against adding refs to the lead. However, since the lead is meant to be a summary of the article below, it seems redundant to reference every line of the lead. Nevertheless, I added the duplicate reference requested. I don't want something this trivial leading to reassessment. Thegreatdr (talk) 18:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References in general

Just as a note, the reference format within this article no longer meets GA criteria. I'll be upgrading the ref format over coming weeks. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Climate Data Chart

Many of the other climate pages (e.g. climate of hong kong, climate of new zealand) present table or graphs of temperature data by month that are really usefull. The chart on the Florida page has two major failings 1. it only states temperatures in Farenheit (most of the world uses celcius) and 2. its very hard to read and only present temperature data (no humidity, average rainfall etc). Is there anything we can do? 202.52.192.35 (talk) 02:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, there are too many cities being tracked. While climate varies widely in this long state, particularly in winter, there is no real excuse for having so many cities. Tallahassee, Jacksonville OR Pensacola should suffice for the north. Orlando for the middle; Miami for the south. Three cities. Period.

Then, we can start thinking about Celsius.

Alternately, we can go to a one-state chart with temperature variations "explained" for the north and south.

If we have a single state (one average for the state), then we can add in all those other things, humidity, rainfall, etc. But again, we would have to "explain" variations in text. While temperatures vary widely in winter, the other parameters really don't vary that much between north and south. Student7 (talk) 20:15, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the table should be revised, but I disagree that the article only requires stats from 3 cities to detail Florida weather. There's a pretty big difference between the climates of locations depending on how far they are from the coast, no matter if they're further north or south. I'm thinking Pensacola for the coastal panhandle, Tallahassee for the interior panhandle, Jacksonville for the NE corner, Miami for the SE corner, Tampa for the west coast, Key West for the keys, and Orlando in the middle. Is the article so long that it couldn't support small monthly high/low and precipitation tables for 7 representative cities? If they're stacked atop each other, it would be easy to compare the numbers through the year. Zeng8r (talk) 10:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(It's so typical that we can only get two comments on an article page. We are probably going to have to go to the Florida Project AND the Florida page to requisition more comments. Project page probably won't get (m)any editors either). Student7 (talk) 18:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sad but true. Is there less participation across wikipedia in general or just on Florida-related articles? Because it seems that hardly anyone is active any more around here...

Anyway, take a look at the St. Petersburg climate table in the Climate of the Tampa Bay area article. It's simple and compact enough that we could pick a few representative Florida cities and create a series of stacked tables to clearly show the differences. (The Tampa table at that location is too big to duplicate multiple times in this article, imo.) Zeng8r (talk) 13:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We had a similar discussion at Talk:Florida in 2007 and again in 2008 (when it was changed), and the seven cities selected on that page are the six cities with NOAA regional offices, plus Pensacola, which is covered by the Mobile office. The distribution does a fairly good job of covering the entire state, and has the added benefit of conforming to the same general standards used by the government. Horologium (talk) 01:50, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly the same table that's used here, actually. It's fine for the general Florida article, but since this is the primary climate article, the one here should include Celsius conversions and precipitation info.

I did the bold thing and made a template with the stacked infoboxes as described above. It's a little large, imo, but I'm not well-versed enough with wikitables and infoboxes to sleek it up. Anybody up for a second draft? Zeng8r (talk) 13:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, great, you've solved the problem.

To answer an earlier question, lack of serious editors is not limited to "Florida" but is Wikipedia-wide, except for a relative handful of controversial articles. Editor Kumioko was trying to address this, in part, by "rolling up" the Projects to a higher level to give a venue to discussions.

The higher ups are more worried that serious editors, increasing too slowly, will ultimately be overrun by vandals! Basically, we are spread a bit too thin. I have tried to encourage newbies who seem capable. About all I can do. Student7 (talk) 13:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Climate of Florida. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:44, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Climate of Florida. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100314165738/http://www.floridatoday.com:80/article/20100311/NEWS01/3110311/Casualties-of-cold-enhance-fire-fear to http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20100311/NEWS01/3110311/Casualties-of-cold-enhance-fire-fear

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Climate maps

The second climate map is largely inaccurate. It either needs to be updated or removed from the article. It is taken from the global map featured on the Köppen classification article, and Florida isn't the only region inaccurately represented there. Data sets from NOAA are available for anyone interested. Berkserker (talk) 06:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Climate of Florida. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:44, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Climate of Florida. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Climate of Florida. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930015938/http://www.local6.com/weather/10375709/detail.html to http://www.local6.com/weather/10375709/detail.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/L6.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:12, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Climate of Florida. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]