Talk:Wind power in the United Kingdom: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:29, 9 April 2017

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wind power in the United Kingdom 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

Archives: 1: 2 months

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United Kingdom High‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Energy Mid‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Environment Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wind power in the United Kingdom 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

Archives: 1: 2 months

MW vs GW

Para 2 says; "total installed capacity of over 14 gigawatts: 9,004 megawatts of onshore capacity and 5,098 megawatts of offshore capacity.[5] "

9MW + 5MW is 14MW, not GW so one of these sets of figures is the wrong SI unit...

I'm guessing the GW one, (because the UK's total capacity is 50GW) but I'm not sure enough to edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.81.250.187 (talk) 17:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, the article is correct that's 9004 MW not 9.004 MW. THe ',' is used as a separator in the UK, not as a decimal place.GliderMaven (talk) 19:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Need for specific dating on all Wikipedia pages concerning Wind Power

The installation of new wind power projects has become so rapid that Wikipedia is experiencing difficulties in keeping up to date. The article here, in paragraph 1, states that the installed capacity of onshore wind power in the whole of the UK is 9,512 megawatts. In another Wikipedia article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_onshore_wind_farms_in_the_United_Kingdom , at the bottom of the table therein) the same value is quoted as 3679.68 megawatts. The discrepancy between 3679 and 9512 MW lowers the confidence of the reader in the accuracy of the figures presented by Wikipedia.

May I suggest that figures of this type need to be accompanied by the date on which they were calculated and last believed to be accurate.Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref></ref></ref>

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 }}
 {{Auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot I |age=60 |dounreplied=yes\|small=Yes}}
-== Spawn? ==
-This article has grown rather large, nearing the 100k suggested limit. The section on offshore could be spawned into a new article. The offshore and onshore lists are also articles on their own, and could be limited to perhaps 10 entries here. [[User:TGCP|TGCP]] ([[User talk:TGCP|talk]]) 11:06, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
-: Sure, it is getting rather unwieldy. Perhaps [[Offshore wind power in the United Kingdom]]? It seems [[List of offshore wind farms in the United Kingdom]] and [[List of onshore wind farms in the United Kingdom]] already exist but the info from this article could be merged into them if it is not already present. As you say, we probably only need the 10 largest offshore and onshore on this page. [[User:Delusion23|<font color="green">'''Del</font><big><sub><font color="black">♉</font></sub></big><font color="green">sion'''</font><font color="black">'''23'''</font>]] [[User talk:Delusion23|<font color="green">(talk)</font>]] 18:27, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
-::Yes, a split would help improve readability and manageability of the article. Tables limited to 10 lines would help too. regards, [[User:Johnfos|Johnfos]] ([[User talk:Johnfos|talk]]) 20:25, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
-::No, this is incredibly often misunderstood. The size of the raw file has *nothing* to do with splitting; that gets bumped up by all the wiki annotation without affecting the readability much at all. It's actually nowhere near the relevant 100k limit, and it already has subarticles anyway. The stats for the article currently are: 28 kB (4730 words). You're supposed to consider a split at around 50kB of ''text''/10,000 words, we're about half that.[[User:GliderMaven|GliderMaven]] ([[User talk:GliderMaven|talk]]) 21:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
-:::Let's not get too hung up with article length; it is just one factor to be considered when splitting (see [[WP:Split]]). [[User:Johnfos|Johnfos]] ([[User talk:Johnfos|talk]]) 08:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 == MW vs GW ==