Talk:Meteorology

Not just the atmosphere

Meteorology is a branch of the atmospheric sciences which includes atmospheric chemistry and atmospheric physics, with a major focus on weather forecasting.

I was reading for a while before the lead first mentions the ocean, and then only in the context of a coupled system, as opposed to the ocean having an active role in weather phenomena.

Previously, it had mentioned meteorological phenomena, which, if you dig into it, does includes the topic storm surge.

It might be helpful to establish that weather is mostly but not exclusively atmospheric in the early going. — MaxEnt 23:40, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps the way in is to mention marine safety as an important aspect of weather forecasting, which besides the spring planting season, was maybe the original driving force behind meteorology in the first place. — MaxEnt 23:42, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Well, I went ahead and added the following sentence: "An important domain of weather forecasting is marine weather forecasting as it relates to maritime and coastal safety, in which weather effects also include atmospheric interactions with large bodies of water." Feel free to do better. — MaxEnt 23:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Okay, now I'm getting pedantic, but does a large shower of volcanic ash constitute a weather event? I was once in the corner of the Mount St Helens ash dump. I didn't regard that as weather at the time. Nor would I regard exploding whales as weather, either. But to the degree that volcanic ash affects insolation, I would regard it as a weather effect. — MaxEnt 23:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

This useful discussion highlights the additional work we must do across a range of articles to distinguish between climate and weather and explain how they interact. All weather is a product of the climate system, which is made of up of five interacting parts and has several biogeochemical process moving through them. Climate change can happen in response to "internal variation" or "external forcing", where the internal/external refers to the parts of the climate system. One of those parts is the Lithosphere. Climatologists consider the origins of Volcanism to be deeper than that, so Mt St Helens would be considered an "external forcing". Certainly during a period of ash fall the US National Weather Service would include that hazard and air quality in general in their reporting, but that doesn't make those phenomena weather per se. Volcanic ash (suspended) is mostly at Climate change#Volcanism (which is probably going to be part of a pending content split when we create a new article on "climate forcings" or maybe "external climate forcings". See also Earth's energy budget and Climate change feedback. And so several of the things you might be describing are certainly influencing the long term average weather, and so are discussed under climate. They are relevant to this article for explaining the climate context in which weather happens, but they aren't short term weather in themselves. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Lead

@ZergTwo:, thank you for being more clear about your concern regarding the lead, i.e. the lead length. You are correct that my edits to the lead made it longer than is recommended in the Manual of Style. I will address the problem shortly. However, MOS:LEADLENGTH is not a binding rule that one has to "comply" with to the letter and if one violates it, everything he did becomes void, but it is rather a general guideline. It may seem rash, and frankly overly dismissive and hostile that you deleted wholesale all the edits I made, all of it under the pretext of lead length. Instead of expressing your concern by deleting substantial amount of good faith constructive contributions under the guise of leadlength "non compliance" and leaving unclear comments, It would have been much more collegial and respectful to the spirit of Wikipedia to open a section about it in the talk page and inform me about it. I hope to collaborate with you in a friendly manner. - Zaheen (talk) 11:09, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

I did not base my entire reason on MOS:LEADLENGTH; MOS:LEAD is my main concern. MOS:LEADLENGTH was the primary reason. I recommended you read MOS:LEAD to ensure that any future changes you make to the lead comply with this guideline. Besides, I do not understand why the lead needs rewriting. There are bigger problems that require attention, such as improving the overall quality of the article body. ZergTwo (talk) 17:58, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello again. I have addressed your primary concern regarding lead length. I don't see any other problem with the lead. Regarding MOS:LEAD, as far as I can see, the new edits are fine by the guideline. They are relevant, factual, neutral, impersonal, and sourced when necessary, etc. The lead is now more clearly organized as well, summarizing the body of the article. If you have any specific concern about the lead, please mention it clearly here, instead of pointing towards a guideline page. Please do not remove contents wholesale again, just because you "do not understand why". That is not how content removal works in Wikipedia. One cannot just remove content because of personal taste.

Finally, if you have any concern regarding the body, feel free to start a new section about it, or edit the relevant parts yourself. It's a different issue. Also, it would be nice if your interactions were a bit more friendly. We are all volunteers here. Saying please and thanks more often doesn't hurt, in fact, it is encouraged in WP:Etiquette. Thanks . --Zaheen (talk) 10:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Request to move draft into mainspace

I have created a full draft for Aviation meteorology in my sandbox: User:Prakashrokaya822/sandbox. The current title is only a redirect to Meteorology#Aviation_meteorology. I request that the redirect be replaced with the sandbox draft, as it expands the subject with references from ICAO, FAA, and DGCA. This would provide Aviation meteorology with a standalone article as a notable topic in aviation safety, flight planning, and pilot training. Prakashrokaya822 (talk) 07:59, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

"Weather research" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Weather research has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 December 27 § Weather research until a consensus is reached. A1Cafel (talk) 09:45, 27 December 2025 (UTC)