Talk:The Weather Channel (United States)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Georgia (U.S. state) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article related to meteorology and/or specific weather events is part of WikiProject Meteorology and Weather Events, an attempt to standardize and improve all articles related to weather or meteorology. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at its talk page. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance within WikiProject Meteorology. |
- for older discussions look here: Archive
Contents |
[edit] Australia
Was the Australia Weather Channel part deleted? There is no seperate page for it. I think it should be added/readded to this article like many articles which merge countries. Mike 19:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Red links
I'm as much of a fan of red links as the next person, but do all these meteorologists merit articles? If so, certainly keep the redlinks. But I'm guessing that not all of these people are notable enough, despite being involved with the weather channel. I don't know much about meteorology, so could someone who does go through and de-link the least important of these? Thanks, Makemi 22:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree to an extent. I am going to gut all red links on -past-. Should we remove the rest for current or should they stay on? Binarypower 19:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
They don't really know there was the program called Charlie the Red Dog. Oh, there is another show featuring a red dog called Clifford, but that is a PBS show and he is mostly a giant-sized dog. What I particularly mean is both of them have the same long ears and the same color of their fur for good measure. I know The Weather Channel ran this show from 1982 until 1991. That's enough for right now.
--65.54.154.151 16:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Physical location
The Weather Channel's offices and studios are now north and east of the I-285/75 interchange; that area is not considered Vinings by locals. It is in unincorporated Cobb, and is closest to the city limts of Smyrna and Marietta. Most locals consider that particular area to be part of Marietta, and refer to it as such, more than anything else. The more-or-less formal boundary for Vinings in that area is either US 41 or Interstate 75 (though Vinings is pretty much an informal designation that is more a part of Smyrna than anything else any more).
They moved from the Cumberland Blvd. location (which IS in Vinings) several years ago. --Mhking 16:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Where is the TWC schedule?
Looks like TWC is now back to almost 24/7 live weather, I believe it started on June 12th and they probably have canceled all those old specials, but I am not sure. The channel could have changed their content of probably giving more airtime to meterologists and the weather.
What happened to List of Current Programming on The Weather Channel schedule? It redirects back to article of the channel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.54.98.109 (talk • contribs) 01:59, June 14, 2006 (UTC).
- The list was at List of current programming on The Weather Channel. As for the redirecting, it was getting hard to maintain -- that page was on my watchlist, and so I saw the edit that did that. Everything else will be ignored here per Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to know if there is any comfimation on the new OCM scheduel..
[edit] Past
Whats up with all the red links on the past? This is not needed as was removed previously. Binarypower 01:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- Removed a lot of unnecessary fat from the article. Mostly red links and commercial schedules Binarypower 01:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- Speaking of red links, I removed (delinked) most of them overall due to the fact that it was mostly redundant (especially in the "programming schedule" section as well as this one). --Moreau36 20:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Lexington crash
Does somebody want to either modify or delete the bit of info relating to the ComAir crash in Kentucky? The english is faulty, and I'm therefore puzzled as to how it even relates (but I am intrigued by a possible connection). --{{SUBST:User:Coryma}} 21:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Deceased?
What is up with alot of people from TWC dieing? Is someone just adding this to be an idiot or are the people at TWC old,brittle, things? I mean look hereand you'll see what I mean. -24.92.41.95 19:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What is up with the new Weather Channel Line UP?
I am really un-happy with the new TWC line up!!! What happend to Hillary Andrews!?!?! The new Day Planner anchors are really boring!! I really wanted Jeff and Vivian to host it!
[edit] Section Clean-up
I have cleaned up and revised the "Local on the 8's" section. Feel free to remove the tag from the section at your earliest convenience. It should read a lot better now. --Bdj95 05:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kristina Abernathy "merge"
That's not a merge, it's a delete/redirect. I propose that a real merge should be done, since that was the result of the AfD. Valrith 22:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding the Heidi Cullen affair
We have an anon IP who is continually inserting right-slanted edits into the section on the 2007 blog controversy. For what it's worth, while conservatives seem to be trying to make this into a cause celebre (and there is some indication that this may be an astroturf campaign), the vast majority of the scientific community considers it to be a right-wing temper tantrum and therefore a tempest in a teapot. It also does not help that said anon clearly lacks the scientific background to be making knowledgeable contributions to this section -- no, you're not required to have a PhD, but a back-of-the-envelope understanding of the basic issues involved (as well as a firm grasp of the scientific definition of "theory") would go a long way towards knowing what is needed to comment knowledgeably.
As it is, the article fails to reflect both that anthrogenic global warming is in fact the accepted scientific consensus, and that the vast majority of Dr. Cullen's critics are coming from the right side of the political spectrum. Thoughts? Haikupoet 06:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I noticed that the erroneous allegation in the Trivia section that Dr. Cullen had claimed that the "job" of the TWC was "not to report the weather" has been removed. The article still does not mention that Dr Cullen's views on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are well within the mainstream of professional climatologists, and may impart the notion that AGW is still somehow "controversial" in the scientific world.bluetaco 23:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I don't know if it's just that I am not too smart or my English skills not enough (both things are possible), but the thing is that neither from the article section nor from here I am able to get whether Heide is backing the theory that human emissions are behind the globate warming or exactly opposite....maybe a clearer wording would help the not that smart guys like me? Mountolive 05:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- ps. I would open a new section called "criticism" or something like that, including, at least the following
- exaggerated emphasis on the catastrophic dimension of weather vs the educational: of course I understand they have to sell and that forecasting a week of sun and a few light showers is not that exciting but, mate, last season they looked like they were eager for the bigger hurricanes possible, by the end of the season I think they were a bit dissappointed! Since this is very subjective, we can quote all the "it could happen tomorrow" stuff...
- as I said above, I really don't get whether they are generally speaking backing the theory that global warming is emissions related or not
but I suspect they don't. I am not saying it is, I don't know, but the consensus amongst meterologists is that yes there is a connection and this is very rarely heard, if heard at all, in TWC. It would be maybe interesting to rewrite this section to put the story in more plain words. Thanks!
Mountolive 05:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Weather Channel is boring
I am not sure The Weather Channel will survive for 24 hours, it is also a problem for other people who still don't watch the TWC. Since there are many internet sources for weather, nowadays, including local TV stations. --4.85.128.184 22:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
