Talk:Wind power
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wind power 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 |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
Wind power was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Wind turbine was copied or moved into Wind power with this edit on 17 August 2021. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Should non-electricity be in History section?
[edit]@Ita140188 You tagged because “The article seems to be exclusively about producing electricity from wind power, but then history section talks about windmills and sails” so you think that should be removed from history? Or if not what do you suggest? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Perhaps it should be removed from history and the page on history of wind power would explain it only. More can be included on the development of the electricity producing wind turbine over time and what companies were involved on the Wind Power page history section. Also, should the definition be revised to Wind Power is the process of generating energy from the wind as apposed to useful work? (the short description of the article is about producing electricity) Just my thoughts. Knowledgegatherer23 (talk) 00:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- (or people involved) Knowledgegatherer23 (talk) 00:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think we can keep the information about historical use of wind power, but we need to be explicit from the lead that this article only deals with electricity production. The history section should then reflect this, briefly talking about pre-electricity uses but then focusing on the history of wind power for electricity production (which is mostly what it already does actually) --Ita140188 (talk) 09:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have excerpted - feel free to revert and solve the problem your way if you prefer Chidgk1 (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
No legitimate source for the claim that Hammurabi had a plan to use wind power
[edit]I was interested in the information that Hammurabi might have used wind power and tried to find more details only to discover that every reference I found about this (on Wikipedia or otherwise) ultimately cites the 1976 book The Generation of electricity by wind power by E. Golding which has a single throwaway line about it and which itself only cites The Story of the Rotor by Anton Flettner from 1926, which has a single throwaway line with no source whatsoever.
the Golding book: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Generation_of_Electricity_by_Wind_Po/lRojAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Hammurabi
the Flettner book: https://books.google.com/books?id=W99NAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&vq=hammurabi&dq=flettner%20the%20story%20of%20the%20rotor&pg=PA95#v=snippet&q=hammurabi&f=false
I have only just created an account to post this and can't edit the page myself since it's protected, but it seems to me that this information has no real source and should be removed? If so can someone with access remove it? Minovi (talk) 15:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Economics and policy sections seem incomplete
[edit]In the current version, the 'Economics' section is very limited. It mentions costs but fails to mention the value of the electricity generated by wind power plant. I suggest adding a few sentences and linking to the 'Merit Order' page, which describes the value problem of variable renewable energy in detail.
Likewise, the content of the 'Central Government' subsection under 'Politics' is very limited and I also found it misleading. The references are almost exclusively referring to offshore wind. The first sentence seem to indicate that new installations are "generally subsidy free", but I believe this refer to offshore wind power only. I suggest rewriting this section completely, shift focus to both onshore and offshore wind power, and broaden the geographical scope. Tove-88 (talk) 11:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2024
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Economcis = Economics 2603:8000:D300:3650:B089:CD81:58FB:92D (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. 💜 melecie talk - 07:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delisted good articles
- B-Class level-3 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-3 vital articles in Technology
- B-Class vital articles in Technology
- B-Class Environment articles
- High-importance Environment articles
- Sustainability task force articles
- B-Class energy articles
- Top-importance energy articles
- B-Class Climate change articles
- Top-importance Climate change articles
- WikiProject Climate change articles
- B-Class physics articles
- Mid-importance physics articles
- B-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
- B-Class fluid dynamics articles
- Fluid dynamics articles
- B-Class Mills articles
- High-importance Mills articles