Talk:Climate of Minnesota

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Climate of Minnesota article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2

Climate of Minnesota 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 February 16, 2011.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 7, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
December 12, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
February 10, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
March 13, 2021	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

Minnesota Top‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Climate Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Climate task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

FA status

Congratulations to those who have brought this to FA status so soon after its creation. It is an impressive and well-researched body of work.

I believe that some sections could still benefit from a copyedit and some tightening. I will do that, on a section-by-section basis, so that changes anyone disagrees with my changes can more easily revert them. Kablammo 01:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A thanks to those who helped out on the In popular culture section. It was thrown together at a moment's notice and I think it really rounded out the article nicely. Gopher backer 03:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help out. --Elkman - (Elkspeak) 19:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article of theDay

Anyone want to add this to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests? A solstice or equinox would be good days. -Ravedave ^{(Adopt a State)} 04:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've pecked at this a little more over the last couple months, trying to sharpen it up more for a front page appearance. However after looking at the reuest page, I'm a little confused. Can there really only be 5 requests open at once? Gopher backer (talk) 04:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Train actually stuck?

I found something in the MHS photo archive, here is the caption:

Southern Minnesota Division, Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul passenger train coming through a snow cut near Sherburne.

Here's the link

They don't actually show the picture, but it looks like the same thing. Gopher backer 16:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image questions

I added an image I found from the Lake Superior article into the Lake Superior section on this article. Does that work? Also, a friend of mine has a great, unique picture of a rainbow that he took from right outside his house that I'd like to fit in here too. I'm wondering if I should put this in the In Popular Culture section, or not becuase it doesn't really fit the theme of that section? If we don't put it there, does anyone have a good idea for an image for that section? Would it be possible to get a screenshot of a barren snow covered landscape from Fargo? (I'm not familiar at all with the rules surrounding movie screenshots) Gopher backer 02:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The photo is pretty good, but there might be something better on flickr. There are 2000+ images when I searched for CC by SA images with "lake superior" [1]. I think an ice fishing picture would be good for the pop culture section. Again there are lots on flicker [2], this one is esp cool[3]. If you want help uploading pics from flickr drop me a note. The Fargo pic would be cool but it may not meet the fair use rules, and a free pic is probably more in the wikipedia spirit. -Ravedave 03:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spring flooding

Should the flooding section make a note about ice dams (aka ice jams), they seem to have caused problems this year. It looks like the ice dam article needs work too... -Ravedave 03:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added it in. Gopher backer 16:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arctic

I don't think arctic should be capitalized. What's the rationale?--Appraiser 01:54, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked Wiktionary.[4] As a noun, Arctic is capitalized; as an adjective it's not.--Appraiser 02:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So the article needs mixed case, maybe(?). Air from the Arctic is "Arctic air", but air that is cold is "arctic air".[5] I believe all uses of "arctic" should be removed, and possibly some of the "Arctic" ones as well. "Polar" is used in the article in conjunction, perhaps a switch over to that might be better. -Ravedave 04:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll defer on the capitalization since I have no idea, but there is a difference between Polar & Arctic air masses. Polar air is generally considered the air that is in Minnesota most most of the fall through the early spring, while Artic air is much colder, well below zero. Arctic air is the coldest air we get here and usually only occurs from Dec - March. [6] Gopher backer 04:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Topics?

Should Straight-line winds and Derechos be mentioned in the article? The Boundary Waters-Canadian Derecho made wikipedia's List of derecho events -Ravedave 14:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't use the specific term of straigt line winds (we could change it to do so), but these are addressed in the summer precipitation section. Gopher backer 17:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently I misspelled derecho when I did a find on the article. I added a link to straight line winds. I think thats good enough. -Ravedave 17:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

Should Minnesota weather extremes be merged into this article? --Cyclopia 22:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While this article overlaps the subsidiary page, the latter has a level of detail, including lists and charts, that would occupy too much space on the more general climate article. (Given the information now on the weather extremes article, perhaps the last section of the climate article, a table of weather extremes, could be removed.) As Climate of Minnesota made it to FA it might be best not to clutter it up. Kablammo 00:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ditto, Climate of Minnesota is long enough already. -Ravedave 01:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't this mean that maybe we are including too much information? Do we need a full length article about all the climate extremes of every USA state? Moreover, this actual article is highly redundant. It is full of sentences like: Snow is the main form of winter precipitation, but freezing rain, ice, sleet, and sometimes even rain are all possible during the winter months. (repeated two times, really not informative -this is typical of most northern climates) ; As with many other Midwestern states, winter in Minnesota is characterized by cold (below freezing) temperatures and snowfall. (really not informative as per above) ; Spring is a time of major transition in Minnesota. As winter nears its end, the sun rises higher in the sky and temperatures begin to moderate. (useless at best) and so on. The whole article looks like it can be packed into a bit more than half its length without losing significant information. Such an article should focus on weather patterns unique of Minnesota or of some importance, IMHO, to be of real encyclopedic value. --Cyclopia 08:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota weather patterns do not need to be unique to be encyclopedic. An article is "full-length" if it says what it needs to say, and no more. The weather extremes article could use some copyediting. Perhaps we should do that first and see how long it is then. Kablammo 11:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my suggestion. The way I look at it, and this was already mentioned, if you combined the information from Minnesota weather extremes into Climate of Minnesota, and then put Climate of Minnesota through the FA process again, it would likely be opposed for being too long. IMO it would be suggested for that particular section to be split off into a different article, since the detail contained in it is more than is needed for Climate of Minnesota. So perhaps what we can do to eliminate the redundancy is to get rid of the prose, and rename Minnesota weather extremes something like List of Minnesota weather records so it would be considered a list rather than an article. It could contain just a brief intro and then only the weather records. We can then elimate the Minnesota weather extremes section from this article, then maybe just link the new List of Minnesota weather records as a See also under the General climatology section.

As far as if that information is actually needed, I think it's legit material. Look at List of Delaware hurricanes; that has been recognized as a Featured List so I think there is a place for stuff like this. Gopher backer 14:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That makes a lot of sense. And in addition to the see also, we could also in-line link within the climate article itself. With subdivisions of the list, we could hyperlink directly from the appropriate places in the climate article to the relevant table. (Example: a main article sentence sentence about temperature extremes could read State record temperatures range from -60 in the northeast to 114 in the west.) We preserve the FA main article, don't clutter it up with a bunch of lists, but those interested in digging deeper can jump directly to the information they want. Kablammo 15:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and made the changes that I suggested. Does that work? Can we remove the Merge tags? Gopher backer 20:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bow Echo

Is it worth adding in Bow echoes? It seems like they have been occurring a lot lately. -Ravedave 03:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, I added something. Gopher backer 15:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been thinking.....

Something that has never quite felt right was things like tornadoes or blizzards ended up under a specific season, even though they occur in three different seasons. I did a little redesign. I don't think I added any content, just moved it around. What does everyone think? User:Gopher backer/sandbox3. Gopher backer 05:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

on the 45th parallel

I removed this edit, though it is an interesting fact it appeared to me to make the sentence state something that isn't true. Just because you're on the 45th parallel doesn't mean you'll automatically have a continental climate. What makes that so for us is that we are landlocked by 1000 miles on all sides. Similarly, there are also many areas that have a continental climate that are nowhere near the 45th parallel. Gopher backer 19:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota's not landlocked to the northeast, or you wouldn't get lake effect snows in the arrowhead. =) Thegreatdr (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Ice Box

I am From Duluth Minnesota and live there 23 years of my life , and Tower Minnesota is not the Ice Box but International Falls is . I am going to change it if no one else will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.19.92 (talk) 05:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if I can re-write that to make more sense. I think that what is there now could be intrepreted as being correct, since, as the reference for that statement points out there is a gray area surrounding the "Icebox of the nation" term. After looking at that more, I think that it should be pointed out that International Falls is the coldest official reporting station in the lower 48, while Tower is the coldest of the smaller reporting stations. Gopher backer 15:22, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

minnesotas climate

minnesota can have cold bruttel winters but it pays off in summer when they have hot warming summers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.133.109 (talk) 18:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it is typically hot in the summer but it gets really cold in the winter sometimes people cant go outside it is so cold —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.88.92.125 (talk) 21:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota's climate needs the average temp, not the highest ever and the lowest ever. Though it gets to -10 for about two weeks and can get to 90, it rarely ever get below or above these temps. Also, we should talk about how we adapt to this weather (we are always by a lake in the summer and have many plows (for snow) and very warm clothing. -A Minnesotan since birth --MiniKing (talk) 14:01, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A bit confused

I recognize that this article is well written an detailed, however am I the only one that finds it odd that Minnesota seems to be one of the only states that has its own page for nearly everything? I mean honestly, there needs greater effort to make a page for EACH INDIVIDUAL state, so there is no bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.250.32.72 (talk) 17:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is written by those who show up, and for a time, there were a lot of editors interested in Minnesota subjects who wrote "daughter articles" as offspring of Minnesota. We can hope that those interested in other states do the same for subjects on those states. Kablammo (talk) 18:52, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We also have the advantage that all the children here are above average. ;-) Seriously, though, congratulations to the contributors. Jonathunder (talk) 23:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are also numerous articles about the history of Texas, mostly written by one editor. And a number of (quite stunning) articles about the ecology and history of Florida written by another. --Moni3 (talk) 02:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where?

When I clicked on the article I came from the main page as I tend to have a look at all of the featured articles, This meant that I wasn't really sure exactly where Minnesota was in the USA. I expect taht most people would come from the Minnesota artilce so would know already but a little map showing the location in the USA would be handy early in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.86.117.126 (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check the winter/Alberta clipper section. The state of Minnesota is in black on that map. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minnesota is linked and described in the lead. (IF you want to see all featured articles, they are at WP:FA). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Climate of Minnesota. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 13:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Climate of Minnesota. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://climate.umn.edu/doc/historical/extremes.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150219182706/http://www.weathernotebook.org/transcripts/2000/02/15.html to http://www.weathernotebook.org/transcripts/2000/02/15.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090107005538/http://climate.umn.edu/doc/historical/winter_storms.htm to http://climate.umn.edu/doc/historical/winter_storms.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://climate.umn.edu/

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) 02:27, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Climate of Minnesota. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101031130258/http://climate.umn.edu/doc/journal/low_pressure_101026.htm to http://climate.umn.edu/doc/journal/low_pressure_101026.htm

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) 08:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Climate of Minnesota. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061211033440/http://climate.umn.edu/pdf/drought88.pdf to http://climate.umn.edu/pdf/drought88.pdf

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) 13:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Split to form article "Winter in Minnesota"

Should we split the "Winter" section out into a new article called "Winter in Minnesota"? This might be good because winter in Minnesota is notable enough and has enough coverage to have an article of its own. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 23:49, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Forget it, I've changed my mind. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 23:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Climate of Minnesota. 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) 08:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Climate of Minnesota. 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) 07:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Climate of Minnesota. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070221222924/http://www.ucar.edu/news/features/springstorms/ to http://www.ucar.edu/news/features/springstorms/
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://mnlegacy.org/news/agri_news_2_8_2006.html

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) 06:09, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Polar vortex?

Is it time to add some more info on polar vortex? I found this great image - https://twitter.com/NWSIndianapolis/status/1090293094308892672/photo/1

--Ravedave (talk) 15:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FA concerns

There's significant uncited text, substantial layout issues, and several referencing issues, such as books missing page numbers. This article is no longer at the FA standards. As I have basically no scientific background, I do not feel confident in my ability to fix this. Hog Farm _Bacon 06:01, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]