Talk:El Ejido

We should talk about the quality of the fruits and vegetables. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csantosf (talk • contribs) 08:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on El Ejido. 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/20060819152711/http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/institutodeestadistica/sima/htm/sm04902.htm to http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/institutodeestadistica/sima/htm/sm04902.htm

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) 07:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AEMET opendata

The data seem very dubious especially the almost 19C Jan mean maxes. Can we have full run down per year and month and also know how many are the missing years from a RS? Weatherextremes (talk) 06:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This data is not dubious and came from AEMET OpenData, so it's not a dubious source and it's actually the best and only source we have to put this data here. Here you can see the data that I extracted from AEMET OpenData [1][2] (average highs, average temperature, average lows and precipitation in this order). There are some missing years for annual average temperatures (4 years), but some months have fully 14 years. There is not missing years on precipitation data. Also, this region (where El Ejido is located) is the only region in mainland Spain where the average annual temperature is above 20ºC for 1981-2010 [3][4]. I believe that 20ºC annual average temperature region increased in 1991-2020 normals. Farell37 (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. However please do not remove the RS link I provided. You need to find a source that verbatim says this is a WMO station. Also the data are provisional. If you fail to do so then this is a edit warring of a content dispute and we should escalate. Weatherextremes (talk) 20:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, we should remove the Evrotas Valley values that are not from WMO? In that case maybe it's irrelevant. Stop trying to vandalize information. It's irrelevant whether or not it's on WMO, it doesn't show all weather stations. The national heat record in Spain was recorded at La Rambla station. Because it is not on this WMO website, is this record non-existent? Another example is the heat record in Portugal was recorded at Amareleja, but this weather station doesn't show on WMO Oscar. Not all weather stations are present on that website. Farell37 (talk) 20:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We can leave the data and of course note as per the RS I provided that this is not a WMO station and its a secondary station. That's fine. Unless we have a reliable source that concretely shows WMO status. Weatherextremes (talk) 21:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so we need to report this case to notice board edit warrings Farell37 (talk) 21:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No rule was broken by Weatherextremes here this time, but it can be considered WP:DISRUPTIVE if he still imposes his POV over these articles.

This data comes directly from a properly and reliable sourced AEMET station. There is nothing to discuss about this. As long as it's mentioned in the AEMET website it doesn't need to be mentioned anywhere else. WikiEditor1890 (talk) 23:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being mentioned in the WMO site is not relevant for anything. It's clear this is an official AEMET station. Don't try to impose your POV again, please. That's WP:SYNTH made by you once again combining a secondary source. Synth means using 2 sources to reach a specific point. Completely against Wikipedia's rules.

This is edit dispute, once again content you are against it for no reasonable reason. Making what you have done with me and @Farell37: now has put both of us to double check each one of your edits.

https://www.aemet.es/es/eltiempo/observacion/ultimosdatos?k=and&l=6291B&w=0&datos=img&x=h24&f=Todas

Above you can find the reliable source that mentions this station. Being included in the secundary Oscar WMO list is not important. You, for example, use only NOA data (which is good, I won't criticise that) but you put the Oscar WMO reference without any reason, as it doesn't contribute with anything useful. The data comes from NOA stations, WMO is not relevant.

Here the data comes from AEMET stations, which is the most reliable source for Spanish climates. Being mentioned in the Oscar WMO site makes no difference. Most AEMET Observation sites aren't mentioned because AEMET is an official public organism, it's goal is to share data with the Government of Spain, not with external organizations. WikiEditor1890 (talk) 22:59, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a WMO RS . You can't just delete it. I think escalation through proper channels is in order. See you soon! Weatherextremes (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright! But, remeber that is irrelevant if is present or not on Oscar WMO. The proof of that, how you explain the Benidorm AEMET station is not present here [5], but has normal values and are present in World Weather Information Service, which also belongs to WMO [6] Farell37 (talk) 01:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your point. This is an official AEMET station from the AEMET site. What is the relationship of the WMO with all of this?

Where in Wikipedia TOS have you read that every single station should appear in the WMO site? Also you're not talking about WMO but Oscar WMO which is only a site that shows the station placements.

Please understand this is an official AEMET site as proven by the sources. You can't just come and say this is a secondary non WMO station. It's not secondary and being mentioned or not in the WMO site is pointless as long as it's an official Spanish Meteorology Agency (AEMET) station. WikiEditor1890 (talk) 08:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Full AEMET OpenData

It appears the station is operational from 2003. Did the editors above miss that? I have updated the weatherbox to include the full data.

Mean annual T stands at 20.05C

Here are the full data: [7] Here is the AEMET OpenData screenshot confirming the times series started in May 2003: [8]

And finally an excellent recourse that all editors can use to facilitate AEMET OpenData data extraction: [9] Weatherextremes (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that this time, you're right! I didn't put before 2010 because of the missing months, that would be much missing years. Anyways, you just offered an alternate great source that appear having the same data as AEMET OpenData shows, so it's great to use on some spanish cities for new reference period (1991-2020). In this case, I have to thank you!

I think the year 2024 should not be included. We don't need to include the current year exactly, because this will be updated after the year ends to have more accurate and precise average temperatures. Furthermore, it may confuse readers a little, as this data takes into account an incomplete year that is ongoing. Farell37 (talk) 20:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 can be included since its a monthly break down. It's actually much more accurate like this. Enjoy the source I provided! Weatherextremes (talk) 20:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]