Talk:Surface weather analysis

Surface weather analysis is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 24, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 10, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
May 10, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
May 25, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
February 5, 2022	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

Weather: Tropical / Non-tropical / Met instruments Top‑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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Tropical cyclones portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tropical cyclones (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Non-tropical storms task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Meteorological instruments and data task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Colour of Occluded Front Symbols

Often on TWC's weather maps, the occluded front is purple. Andros 1337 16:33, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hrm, yeah I've seen it both ways. The important thing is really the shape, as I don't think the colour is standardized. Do you think I should change it, or what? -Lommer | ^talk 00:51, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, change it to avoid confusion with the stationary front. Andros 1337 01:15, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's taken me little while, but I've finally updated it. -Lommer | ^talk 00:25, 21 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you lot know, in the UK occluded fronts are hardly ever purple, mostly just alternating red/blue. Not worth changing the picture though. --Albert 19:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons

Ther are some images at commons, see here. Examples: Image:Warmfrontokklusion en.png, Image:Kaltfrontokklusion en.png and if you want to translate them also here and here. --Saperaud 3 July 2005 08:07 (UTC)

Those show warm & cold occlusions which I am currently revising for Geography A-level. These require a bit of explanation and perhaps give good reason for a separate 'Occlusion' article.--Albert 18:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a disconnect between the United States NWS surface analyses and other countries on the depiction of occlusions at this time. The U.S. version always starts with a cold pip regardless, and doesn't switch the direction of pips behind the cyclone like the U.K. does. I doubt this was an intentional move, but it has been that way for years now. Thegreatdr 02:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting Up

I think it would be a good idea to have a seperate page for the different fronts. Give a basic description of them (the current ones). Then have a link to their main page which would have more in depth detail. What do you all think? -- Jesusfreak 03:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. To avoid confusion, it would be best to separate the topics, even if they share something in common.--Wired2Narnia Christchild

It is probably not required. The weather section is riddled with stub articles, and this article is one of the stubs. If this page gets really long, it would make more sense to separate this page out into multiple articles. Thegreatdr 17:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Name Change

Changed the name of the page from Weather Fronts to Surface Analysis - Weather. The page Weather Maps was so closely related I added the information from the page to the top of this one and left a link to this one. Improved the format of the resultant page and included information on mesoscale boundaries which are seen and analyzed on the surface analyses over the United States. Included the links to the NWS Unified Surface Analysis and its associated manual. References also were added. Expanded the history section initially in the weather map page to more fully document the early rise of surface analyses. Thegreatdr 02:26, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. But is 'Surface Analysis - Weather' too complicated/odd a title? What about just 'Surface Analysis'?--Albert 16:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm worried other disciplines may have techniques known as surface analysis. I'll change it to Surface weather analysis, to sound less awkward. Thegreatdr 17:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dry line definition

By definition, drylines form in response to downsloped air of the higher terrain of the Rockies

I find it very difficult to believe that this is the definition of a dry line. Surely this phenomenon occurs elsewhere in the world? -dmmaus 05:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've marked it up with "citation needed." -- Captaindan 20:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The original definition was modified for the broader audience. The Bluestein definition is clear about dry lines lying east of the Rockies, however. To my knowledge, no European, Asian, South American, or Mexican weather maps depict the dryline. Thegreatdr 18:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reformating

Now that the article has been nominated for GA status, the references have been reformatted to the style used on other weather-related Wikipedia pages. A See Also section has also been introduced. Thegreatdr 19:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article

I've read the article and found it to be quite well written, and for its length, quite comprehensive. As such I have decided to give it GA status. However, are these the only symbols used in SWA? Maybe more content for aviation symbols and info? Sjschen 21:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a graphic showing common aviation symbols for ongoing weather shown on weather maps. There are other symbols that are sometimes plotted, such as for turbulence, which are not included on the graphic. Thegreatdr 17:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is good...is it time for peer review? --Hard Raspy Sci 18:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been submitted as a FAC, which has already led to some improvements. Feel free to make suggestions. Thegreatdr 15:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Q about Outflow boundaries/squall lines

in the article under the Outflow boundaries/squall lines section, it mentions "with the resultant Mesoscale Convective System (MCS) forming at the point of the upper level split in the wind pattern running southeast into the warm sector parallel to low-level thickness lines." The word "southeast" piqued my interest... is this statement only true for the Northern Hemisphere? And if so, should it be changed? 68.146.221.56 13:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably so. Good catch. Thegreatdr 00:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review and FAC

Extensive comments have been left for potential improvements to this article. These comments can be found at the peer review (see box above for more info). Later. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments were very helpful...thank you. Thegreatdr 15:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no comments left with this article, either in peer review or FAC, for about 2 weeks. If interested, review the article for FAC and provide comments on whether or not additional changes are needed before FAC can be supported. Thegreatdr 13:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to those that worked to get sfc analysis to FA status, are there any plans for a similar article on upper air analysis? Evolauxia 22:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upper air analysis would easily fit within the weather map article. Thegreatdr 09:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The weather maps article is the surface analysis article, which is fairly complete yet not too cumbersome, so the addition of upper air analysis seems reasonable. Once that was done, a name like map and chart analysis would be appropriate. Evolauxia 06:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad...I meant weather map, not weather maps. That article is different from this one. Thegreatdr 19:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Q about definitions of Cold Front and Warm Front

Both cold fronts and warm fronts are described as being at the leading edge of the temperature drop off. I find this confusing. Would someone who knows something about meterology, please clarify this? Thanks. --Siegele (talk) 21:43, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fronts are meant to be at the leading edge of the temperature drop off, because that's where the pressure trough and active weather occur. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Links

Occluded Front (with a capital F) redirects to this page, and not Occluded front (lower case f). Is this a mistake? --El Pollo Diablo (Talk) 13:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it now --El Pollo Diablo (Talk) 13:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Do we have to have a map of the United States as the definitive example? Couldn't we enhance the world view of this article by perhaps using a surface weather analysis of somewhere more obscure? Black-Velvet 06:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a case of a non-copyrighted surface weather analysis from another country, be bold and include it. As far as I know, the U. S. is one of the only countries where work of its federal government is free of copyright restrictions, and therefore able to be included within wikipedia. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arctic Blast

Arctic Blast redirects to this article, and yet, there is not a single mention of arctic blast in the article except for the mention of redirect at the beginning. I wanted to know what an arctic blast is, but this article does not provide it, unless I missed it (I have not read the whole article). Can anyone with knowledge either add some information about it, or cut off the redirect and write an article about it. Searching the web does not help, as all that comes up are instances of arctic blasts, movies, and sport teams, none of which provides information about the definition or the mechanism. For that reason, I believe it is very important to provide information about this phenomenon, for the information is unavailable anywhere accessible on the web.

I guess cold front would be a better place for the redirect, but still, that's not completely correct either. Not all cold fronts have arctic air in their wake. Thegreatdr (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Surface weather analysis. 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) 19:50, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Surface weather analysis. 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) 04:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Surface weather analysis. 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) 01:32, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:URFA/2020

Large swaths of unsourced text, including an entire section.
Plenty of recent academic literature that needs to be incorporated.

Surely something new has happened since 2001 history-wise.

Grammatical issues throughout the article.

Adding to WP:FARGIVEN due to serious issues with the article. Noah^Talk 23:35, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article does have a reverse copy. Further checks for copyright are encouraged even though it isn't officially under the WPTC CCI umbrella. Noah^Talk 23:40, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Noah, if you'll point out the reverse copy, I can add the {{Copied}} template. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to have been taken care of. Noah^Talk 01:06, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]