This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 11 October 2018. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If you are not a Wikipedia editor, you can add reliable sources (RS) below and an editor can contribute to the article. (You can become an Wikipedia editor!) If you personally disagree with the concept of climate change in general, this talk page is not the place for that, even if your own personal reasons are really good. However, if you have a specific RS that mentions the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5ºC, please add it below, even if it is critical of their findings. The reliable sources we use can express criticism. They can be biased or against the topic of the article. However, every editor that contributes must ensure that their contribution to this article and others, is neutral, and does not reveal the editor's personal bias. Oceanflynn ( talk) 16:00, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Ex From Twitter
Adding to list Oceanflynn ( talk) 18:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
References
Distinct difference in amount of coral that would remain under two climate change scenarios. IPCC climate change report calls for urgent action to phase out fossil fuels
Adding to list Oceanflynn ( talk) 18:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
References
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oceanflynn ( talk • contribs) 17:28, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
This would make a great Wikinews item. Anyone want to help? Oceanflynn ( talk) 16:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Is this the right info box? There is a template problem with it. Thanks. I am also attempting to create a related WikiNews item and I would like to have it looking acceptable. Oceanflynn ( talk) 18:14, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Moved the list from article following advice of jmcgnh
I have created a Contributors to the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5ºC user page. Oceanflynn ( talk) 16:58, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Contributing authors include [1] [2]:
References
IPCC_SR15_experts
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page)."IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (
link)
I just added a space between "1.5" and "°C" throughout to comply with WP:MOSNUM. The title still needs correcting but I don't know how to fix that. Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 20:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
In the Main Statements section, I don't think we should start off with text like "This report" or "According to this report." I think it's understood that the whole article is about the report. Musujyay ( talk) 17:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
The current title of this article uses the the (º) character to represent degrees. However, this character is actually º and is the "masculine ordinal indicator", not the degree sign. The degree sign (°) is ° and is used throughout the article itself. Should the article title be changed to use the degree sign? I do not think that this is a technical limitation of Wikipedia titles, but rather inconsistency in how we each write the symbol.
For now, I have created a page with the same name but using the degrees symbol ( Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C) and made it redirect here to this page. Perhaps it should be the other way around? ChromeGames923 ( talk) 17:46, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
This is dubious in the lede: "Its broad findings are reported as being that drastic action must be taken". It may well be true that it is being reported as such, but it doesn't appear to be true that the report does so. The headline statements [1] contain no recommendations, and certainly no use of the word drastic William M. Connolley ( talk) 06:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
The following citation markup is preferable to that currently used (in my opinion). [1] Those working on this article might like to transfer it? RobbieIanMorrison ( talk) 19:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
References
This sentence
"580 GtCO2 and 420 GtCO2 for a 66% and 50% probability of limiting warming to 1.5 °C, using global mean surface air temperature (GSAT); or 770 and 570 GtCO2, for 50% and 66% probabilities, using global mean surface temperature (GMST)"
is a bit confusing. Surely the 580 GtCO2 refers to the 50% probability and the 420 GtCO2 refers to the 66% probability, as in the less carbon you emit the more likely you are to limit the warming. The GMST probabilities in the second half of the sentence support this reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.143.128 ( talk) 15:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 11 October 2018. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If you are not a Wikipedia editor, you can add reliable sources (RS) below and an editor can contribute to the article. (You can become an Wikipedia editor!) If you personally disagree with the concept of climate change in general, this talk page is not the place for that, even if your own personal reasons are really good. However, if you have a specific RS that mentions the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5ºC, please add it below, even if it is critical of their findings. The reliable sources we use can express criticism. They can be biased or against the topic of the article. However, every editor that contributes must ensure that their contribution to this article and others, is neutral, and does not reveal the editor's personal bias. Oceanflynn ( talk) 16:00, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Ex From Twitter
Adding to list Oceanflynn ( talk) 18:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
References
Distinct difference in amount of coral that would remain under two climate change scenarios. IPCC climate change report calls for urgent action to phase out fossil fuels
Adding to list Oceanflynn ( talk) 18:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
References
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oceanflynn ( talk • contribs) 17:28, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
This would make a great Wikinews item. Anyone want to help? Oceanflynn ( talk) 16:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Is this the right info box? There is a template problem with it. Thanks. I am also attempting to create a related WikiNews item and I would like to have it looking acceptable. Oceanflynn ( talk) 18:14, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Moved the list from article following advice of jmcgnh
I have created a Contributors to the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5ºC user page. Oceanflynn ( talk) 16:58, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Contributing authors include [1] [2]:
References
IPCC_SR15_experts
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page)."IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty
{{
citation}}
: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (
link)
I just added a space between "1.5" and "°C" throughout to comply with WP:MOSNUM. The title still needs correcting but I don't know how to fix that. Dondervogel 2 ( talk) 20:54, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
In the Main Statements section, I don't think we should start off with text like "This report" or "According to this report." I think it's understood that the whole article is about the report. Musujyay ( talk) 17:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
The current title of this article uses the the (º) character to represent degrees. However, this character is actually º and is the "masculine ordinal indicator", not the degree sign. The degree sign (°) is ° and is used throughout the article itself. Should the article title be changed to use the degree sign? I do not think that this is a technical limitation of Wikipedia titles, but rather inconsistency in how we each write the symbol.
For now, I have created a page with the same name but using the degrees symbol ( Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C) and made it redirect here to this page. Perhaps it should be the other way around? ChromeGames923 ( talk) 17:46, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
This is dubious in the lede: "Its broad findings are reported as being that drastic action must be taken". It may well be true that it is being reported as such, but it doesn't appear to be true that the report does so. The headline statements [1] contain no recommendations, and certainly no use of the word drastic William M. Connolley ( talk) 06:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
The following citation markup is preferable to that currently used (in my opinion). [1] Those working on this article might like to transfer it? RobbieIanMorrison ( talk) 19:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
References
This sentence
"580 GtCO2 and 420 GtCO2 for a 66% and 50% probability of limiting warming to 1.5 °C, using global mean surface air temperature (GSAT); or 770 and 570 GtCO2, for 50% and 66% probabilities, using global mean surface temperature (GMST)"
is a bit confusing. Surely the 580 GtCO2 refers to the 50% probability and the 420 GtCO2 refers to the 66% probability, as in the less carbon you emit the more likely you are to limit the warming. The GMST probabilities in the second half of the sentence support this reading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.143.128 ( talk) 15:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)