Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Temperature range
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was move and re-create as a disambiguation page. The moved article, now at Atmospheric temperature needs some work to make it fit into the scope of its new title. I've incorporated suggestions here into the new dab page but there are probably more that could be added. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Temperature range (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A near-tautological dictionary definition followed by an original syntheseis of instances of the phrase in unrelated fields. As pointed out elsewhere, putting "range" after a physical quantity does not make it a notable topic. Wtshymanski (talk) 15:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The article can be moved to "Atmospheric temperature range", which is the main topic - I replaced the "biological" section with a hatnote. It probably needs rewriting with references as some of the content appears to be original research. Peter E. James (talk) 19:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I should think the way forward is to move this content to atmospheric temperature and disambiguate this title between temperature, thermoregulation, operating temperature and the newly-created atmospheric temperature per Peter E. James.—S Marshall T/C 22:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and split. An article about climatological yearly temperature range is needed and intrinsically notable as this topic of temperature ranges is related to proximity to water, ie. continental subarctic regions will have high temperature ranges while tropical coastal regions will have lower temperature ranges. I suggest that the main article be about this topic, giving examples of annual average temperatures at selected locations for different biomes, and a disambiguation page pointing to the other aforementioned topics. Also, the article would benefit from an image showing temperature range map either for a specific continent or worldwide. An article about extraterrestrial temperature ranges on other planets would also be notable, being dependant on the presence or absence of an atmosphere and/or a strong greenhouse effect. Temperature range in meteorological terms is greatly affected by average atmospheric pressure, precipitation and the moderating effect of water, among other factors. One article should focus on one aspect of the term, in order to avoid dictionary-like definitions and syntheses. ~AH1(TCU) 00:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Better to redirect this to a section under "Climate", then. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan Talk Contributions 02:37, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is a useful encyclopaedia article; i.e. the kind of stuff normal people use an encyclopaedia to look up.--Toddy1 (talk) 13:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Normal people? What were you looking to learn when you looked up "temperature range" ? --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:25, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Wtshymanski you had your say at the start of the discussion. Please allow other editors to have their say.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Not a useful answer. You may have noticed, Wikipedia is not paper. What is someone looking for when he or she types "temeprature range" in the search box? Can you tell me? --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Wtshymanski you had your say at the start of the discussion. Please allow other editors to have their say.--Toddy1 (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that Diurnal temperature variation and Diurnal cycle already exist as well as all the articles in {{Climate oscillations}} which are all based on this topic. -Atmoz 16:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The first few words of the lede say everything that can usefully said about "Temperature range". Everything else is just padding. Do normal people really need to look in an encyclopedia to learn that "Temperature range" means a range of temperatures??. Dingo1729 (talk) 22:01, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Could be usefully redirected to Diurnal temperature variation which for all we know is what the reader was looking for anyway. --Wtshymanski (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably not what the creator of the article was looking for, as it was originally about variation over longer periods of time, such as seasonal temperature variations. The information that can be found in the climate article (and by following links to other articles) is more useful, so maybe temperature range should be a disambiguation page (if a useful "atmospheric temperature" or "temperature variation" page is created that can be added to the disambiguation). Peter E. James (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I think modifying it into a disambiguation page is a good idea. -Atmoz (talk) 00:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Temperature range" isn't really ambiguous, it means the same in many different contexts: weather, specifications of an oven, the operating temperature of a computer chip, climate prediction, the temperatures at which iron is liquid, the surface temperature of Mars. Many of these are worth including in appropriate articles, however it is close to impossible to guess what someone is thinking about if they search for "Temperature range". It's just too wide a term; I don't think we should use a disambiguation page to list all contexts in which a term can occur. That's why I voted for a simple Delete. Dingo1729 (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- So if someone searches for "temperature range" your solution is to have them not find anything versus finding a disambiguation page? Oddness, to say the least. -Atmoz (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If the article is properly deleted, typing in "temperature range" will give a list of 2001 (currently) articles on Wikipedia that use this pair of words. Then, the confused reader can consider if he wants to read about the temperature range of Winnipeg in February, the temperature range for cooking an egg, the temperature range of the main-sequence stars, the temperature range for storing wine, or the temperature range of a pregnant gerbil. It's a meaningless search term by itself since it has thousands of possible applications. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- What you are saying Wtshymanski is that it would be an extremely good idea to have either an article or a disambiguation page with the title of this article.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I'm not. A disambiguation page with 2001 entries is worthless. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that what Wtshymanski is saying (or at least what I am saying) is that deleting the page will, if someone types this common phrase into the search box, allow the general search engine to return its list of results and that this is more likely to guide a user to what he is looking for than a disambiguation page will. And I do not find this odd. Dingo1729 (talk) 19:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems to be a valid term, linked in several articles, most frequently referring to climate or diurnal temperature range. A disambiguation page would make it easier to find the correct article and is better than a red link - the topics suggested for disambiguation are currently 2nd, 3rd, 42nd, 51st and 89th in the search results and this clearly isn't a likely term for topics such as ETFE (4th) or List of marine aquarium fish species (5th). Peter E. James (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that what Wtshymanski is saying (or at least what I am saying) is that deleting the page will, if someone types this common phrase into the search box, allow the general search engine to return its list of results and that this is more likely to guide a user to what he is looking for than a disambiguation page will. And I do not find this odd. Dingo1729 (talk) 19:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- No, I'm not. A disambiguation page with 2001 entries is worthless. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- What you are saying Wtshymanski is that it would be an extremely good idea to have either an article or a disambiguation page with the title of this article.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- If the article is properly deleted, typing in "temperature range" will give a list of 2001 (currently) articles on Wikipedia that use this pair of words. Then, the confused reader can consider if he wants to read about the temperature range of Winnipeg in February, the temperature range for cooking an egg, the temperature range of the main-sequence stars, the temperature range for storing wine, or the temperature range of a pregnant gerbil. It's a meaningless search term by itself since it has thousands of possible applications. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:55, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- So if someone searches for "temperature range" your solution is to have them not find anything versus finding a disambiguation page? Oddness, to say the least. -Atmoz (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "Temperature range" isn't really ambiguous, it means the same in many different contexts: weather, specifications of an oven, the operating temperature of a computer chip, climate prediction, the temperatures at which iron is liquid, the surface temperature of Mars. Many of these are worth including in appropriate articles, however it is close to impossible to guess what someone is thinking about if they search for "Temperature range". It's just too wide a term; I don't think we should use a disambiguation page to list all contexts in which a term can occur. That's why I voted for a simple Delete. Dingo1729 (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I think modifying it into a disambiguation page is a good idea. -Atmoz (talk) 00:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Probably not what the creator of the article was looking for, as it was originally about variation over longer periods of time, such as seasonal temperature variations. The information that can be found in the climate article (and by following links to other articles) is more useful, so maybe temperature range should be a disambiguation page (if a useful "atmospheric temperature" or "temperature variation" page is created that can be added to the disambiguation). Peter E. James (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Could be usefully redirected to Diurnal temperature variation which for all we know is what the reader was looking for anyway. --Wtshymanski (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.