This category is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the
history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the category attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
This category 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
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our
recommended sources and our
style guide
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles
Category talk:Climate history is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use
geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Archived renaming discussion
The proposal on
WP:CFD to rename from "Category:History of climate" to something else was not accepted.
Shouldn't this be "history of the climate" or "climatic history" -
SimonP 04:05, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
I vote Keep as is. Climatic history sounds like what a novel has somewhere in the middle. I don't see how adding an article helps the title much. --
ssd 00:11, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep - "Climate" is used as a proper noun in many cases - e.g., "Climate Change" (never "Change of the Climate"). Climate history would also be in keeping with usage (rather than Climatic History).
Guettarda 15:48, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep Much better than the alternative suggestions to my ear.
Philip 20:13, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I find the current name a bit awkward although the suggested names have problems as well. I'd support a rename if someone came up with a really good alternative. If not, I guess it's a keeper.
RedWolf 06:00, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
I think the best name would be "The History of Climate" (with capitals), but that would be against the rules. 22:44, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Rename (pending an agreeable suggestion) I think a rename would be good, as the current name doesn't sit too well with me. The new suggestions don't really do it for me either. Here are some other ways you guys might want to consider--I'm just throwing these out there and tried to make them as different as I could (I don't have a favorite but they might spark some ideas or help consensus): "history of earth's climate" "global climate history" "historical climate changes" "paleoclimatology" "global climate periods". —
Ben 11:13, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
And come to think of it, this is at the crux of my problem with the climate articles (in terms of naming conventions and structure). Rhetorically, "climate change" is a perfect category for documented events. The "
little ice age" was "a climate change." The "
Medieval warm period" is a "climate change." But then again, "
Snowball earth" is a theory of "climate change," not an actual climate change (right?). The problem is, you can't say "Climate Change is the current change in climate." Nor can you say "Global Warming is the study of the warming of the globe." The nomenclature in climatology is very messed up. —
Ben 11:36, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep. None of the alternatives are clearly better. It is clear enough as is. -
Willmcw 22:25, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
Set up merge. Reasons: categories are essentially redundent, but "History of climate" is more inclusive.
Category:Paleoclimatologists should be retained and point here.
Category:Climate change should be disentangled; either both should be valid categories in
Category:Climatology and the present cat also in
Category:Historical geology, or present cat should go into Climate change (as this is more likely to be a first-stop category) in addition to Historical geology categories.
Dysmorodrepanis 03:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)reply
This category is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the
history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the category attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
This category 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
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our
recommended sources and our
style guide
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles
Category talk:Climate history is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use
geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Archived renaming discussion
The proposal on
WP:CFD to rename from "Category:History of climate" to something else was not accepted.
Shouldn't this be "history of the climate" or "climatic history" -
SimonP 04:05, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)
I vote Keep as is. Climatic history sounds like what a novel has somewhere in the middle. I don't see how adding an article helps the title much. --
ssd 00:11, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep - "Climate" is used as a proper noun in many cases - e.g., "Climate Change" (never "Change of the Climate"). Climate history would also be in keeping with usage (rather than Climatic History).
Guettarda 15:48, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep Much better than the alternative suggestions to my ear.
Philip 20:13, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I find the current name a bit awkward although the suggested names have problems as well. I'd support a rename if someone came up with a really good alternative. If not, I guess it's a keeper.
RedWolf 06:00, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
I think the best name would be "The History of Climate" (with capitals), but that would be against the rules. 22:44, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Rename (pending an agreeable suggestion) I think a rename would be good, as the current name doesn't sit too well with me. The new suggestions don't really do it for me either. Here are some other ways you guys might want to consider--I'm just throwing these out there and tried to make them as different as I could (I don't have a favorite but they might spark some ideas or help consensus): "history of earth's climate" "global climate history" "historical climate changes" "paleoclimatology" "global climate periods". —
Ben 11:13, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
And come to think of it, this is at the crux of my problem with the climate articles (in terms of naming conventions and structure). Rhetorically, "climate change" is a perfect category for documented events. The "
little ice age" was "a climate change." The "
Medieval warm period" is a "climate change." But then again, "
Snowball earth" is a theory of "climate change," not an actual climate change (right?). The problem is, you can't say "Climate Change is the current change in climate." Nor can you say "Global Warming is the study of the warming of the globe." The nomenclature in climatology is very messed up. —
Ben 11:36, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep. None of the alternatives are clearly better. It is clear enough as is. -
Willmcw 22:25, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
Set up merge. Reasons: categories are essentially redundent, but "History of climate" is more inclusive.
Category:Paleoclimatologists should be retained and point here.
Category:Climate change should be disentangled; either both should be valid categories in
Category:Climatology and the present cat also in
Category:Historical geology, or present cat should go into Climate change (as this is more likely to be a first-stop category) in addition to Historical geology categories.
Dysmorodrepanis 03:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)reply