Talk:Global Forecast System

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

...one of the five predominant synoptic scale medium-range models in general use

A touch Amerocentric / Eurocentric, perchance? E.g. Japan, Australia ... Gergyl (talk) 06:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I added more major models as listed in Ensemble forecasting, but it would still be nice to find a citation to verify that the list of models represents scientific consensus. MarkWarren (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google search makes it plain, this is a proper name and should remain capitalized as-is:

... the FIM proved to be slower and not appreciably more accurate than the GFS. Initial testing of the FV3 showed promise, ...

I find this confusing - not sure whether the FIM seems to be a significant improvement, or whether it's just slower and slightly more accurate.

What is confusing about "not appreciably more accurate than the GFS"? --R. S. Shaw (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]