Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Severe weather: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 281: | Line 281: | ||
::::Per the Wikimedia Commons, NEXRAD radar loops & all NEXRAD-related images are public domain. They made something using public domain data and even watermarked it with “NOAA” at the top. You are arguing something watermarked with the U.S. government isn’t public domain. The debates have already all been decided on the Commons. And you are right, an admin cannot “unilaterally” say something like that…However, that deletion discussion was a community consensus with even another highly-experienced Commons editor besides myself and the administrator commenting on it. In short — Anything NEXRAD related '''is''' in the public domain unless some aspect of the image/screenshot is directly copyrighted (chaser icon or something else along those lines). Anyone can make a radar loop, in fact RadarScope/RadarOmega/GR products can ''all'' make radar loops. Why should one radar loop (again, attribution watermarked with “NOAA”) be an exception to the U.S. government public domain rule? '''The [[User:WeatherWriter|Weather Event Writer]]''' ([[User talk:WeatherWriter|Talk Page)]] 15:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
::::Per the Wikimedia Commons, NEXRAD radar loops & all NEXRAD-related images are public domain. They made something using public domain data and even watermarked it with “NOAA” at the top. You are arguing something watermarked with the U.S. government isn’t public domain. The debates have already all been decided on the Commons. And you are right, an admin cannot “unilaterally” say something like that…However, that deletion discussion was a community consensus with even another highly-experienced Commons editor besides myself and the administrator commenting on it. In short — Anything NEXRAD related '''is''' in the public domain unless some aspect of the image/screenshot is directly copyrighted (chaser icon or something else along those lines). Anyone can make a radar loop, in fact RadarScope/RadarOmega/GR products can ''all'' make radar loops. Why should one radar loop (again, attribution watermarked with “NOAA”) be an exception to the U.S. government public domain rule? '''The [[User:WeatherWriter|Weather Event Writer]]''' ([[User talk:WeatherWriter|Talk Page)]] 15:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::::P.S. — Are you sure you want to open this can of worms? Any NEXRAD deletion means '''total''' NEXRAD deletion, including all radar images from every Wikipedia page (tornadoes, hurricanes, ect…). The Commons already decided they are public domain, so, at least in my mind, the topic was already formally decided in that deletion discussion. '''The [[User:WeatherWriter|Weather Event Writer]]''' ([[User talk:WeatherWriter|Talk Page)]] 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
:::::P.S. — Are you sure you want to open this can of worms? Any NEXRAD deletion means '''total''' NEXRAD deletion, including all radar images from every Wikipedia page (tornadoes, hurricanes, ect…). The Commons already decided they are public domain, so, at least in my mind, the topic was already formally decided in that deletion discussion. '''The [[User:WeatherWriter|Weather Event Writer]]''' ([[User talk:WeatherWriter|Talk Page)]] 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::{{edit conflict}} And I'll add on that your implication that something being in the public domain means all derivations must therefore be in the public domain isn't right. It wouldn't be PD if there were license restrictions. That's what PD is – no restrictions. The closest you could get would be maybe a Creative Commons license requiring that all derivations use the same license. A discussion involving three Wikimedia Commons users on a single file isn't the same as "Wikimedia Commons decided..." And my argument isn't to try to remove all radar images from Wikipedia or whatever you implied. Other than the aforementioned individual with the radar loop, I feel that RadarScope in particular just seems questionable considering they sell licenses which require annual payment. [[User:Master of Time|<span style="color:green; font-family:Times New Roman"><u>Master of Time</u></span>]] ([[User talk:Master of Time|<span style="color:green; font-family:Times New Roman">talk</span>]]) 15:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 15:17, 3 May 2024
|
| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Severe weather and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
 | Weather: Thunderstorms / Tornadoes Project‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Quick links: |
 | WikiProject Severe weather was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on March 2010. |
|
||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
State of the monthly lists (updated)
Reposting and updating since the previous one was archived. wxtrackercody (talk · contributions) 03:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Extended content
|
|---|
|
United States
No lists from 2001 to 2006, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists from 1991 to 1999, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists from 1984 to 1989, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists from 1974 to 1981, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists from 1955 to 1972, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists for 1953, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists from 1947 to 1949, excluding outbreak articles. Canada No lists for 2024, excluding outbreak articles.
No lists from 1946 to 2022, excluding outbreak articles and the List of Canadian tornadoes and tornado outbreaks and its sub articles. Europe
No list for 2023.
No lists from 2015 to 2021, excluding outbreak articles.
|
@Wxtrackercody, ChessEric, and Mjeims: I think these lists could all use good lead sections to provide a sort of summary of the month/months instead of just the one or two liners we usually have. A 2008 list doesn't even have any lead. I'm currently working on 2011, so I will try to write good sections for those lists. United States Man (talk) 04:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- @United States Man: Gladly. But what do you mean by a "lead"? All articles listed here have a short description describing that the article lists the list of tornadoes in a certain kind of month/multiple month period. I guess I understand for the older years, like the 1950's, where a yearly description could be useful, but in the others, other than reformatting to omit the "Ref" column, I don't know what else can be done. Mjeims (talk) 13:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Mjeims: United States Man is not talking about the short description template; he's talking about making a lead that describes the events that occurred in the months that list article includes. For example, the format I use modern list articles is to say what the page is, put the average number of tornadoes for each given month, describe the tornado activity for the given months, and mention whether or not it was above or below average. It will be tough to do these for the years prior to the 1990s (which is the cutoff we use when it comes to the most accurate number of tornadoes), but I think it can be done. ChessEric (talk · contribs) 14:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a large tornado outbreak underway in the US, specifically Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, West Virginia, Wyoming, Montana +others. Feel free to help, as it is impossible for one person to document the entire thing. Most of it is going to happen later tonight, so information is going to rapidly come in, so by tomorrow there will be a lot more info to build on. Thanks! :D MemeGod ._. (talk) 16:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Changes to Portal:Tornadoes
The recent outbreaks section at Portal:Tornadoes has been changed into a section featuring the tornado content of the current year and will automatically transclude from a list of specified articles. This should make it easier to update since only links need to be added. This change has been made in part since this portal section has not been maintained since the MfD. Noah, AATalk 13:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Description of random radar images and loops as "public domain"
I noticed first, on the article for the recent tornadoes, and now, on the "2024 Sulphur tornado" article, random radar loops have been described as public domain simply by virtue of using PD data. I don't think this is accurate. In the former case, the loop was pulled from a random person on Twitter. Just because someone made a loop in Python or whatever using NEXRAD data doesn't automatically make it free/PD. In the latter case, a screenshot from RadarScope was reused. Is there anything indicating that radar images made using that software are free to reuse? Obviously they are permitted to be posted on social media and the like by users owning the app, but that doesn't automatically equal public domain. Master of Time (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- There was a discussion on the Wikimedia Commons regarding it (actually a deletion discussion) and data/screenshots from NEXRAD are indeed considered public domain, as long as icons that are copyrighted are not present. I.e. like on RadarScope/Radar Omega, some storm chasers have livestream icons, if those are not present, they are considered public domain. Both GR2/3 products, RadarScope & RadarOmega have free-to-use map backgrounds + the public-domain radar data products + public-domain warning polygons. That is at least what Wikimedia Commons decided. Deletion requests/File:Alexander City Tornado Emergency in 2023.jpg was that discussion. That is also why the Wikimedia Commons has a whole category filled with NEXRAD radar images: Commons Category:Weather radar images. In short, if no storm-chaser icons (due to individual copyrights) are present, the data is considered automatically public domain under PD-USGov-NEXRAD. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- A comment and direct statement from an administrator on the Wikimedia Commons in that discussion: “
The data is clearly PD. While the software which was used to present it is copyrighted, the only human involvement is by the uploader…It is well established the output of a computer does not itself have a copyright unless it is derived from a copyrighted work.
” The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- That administrator doesn't have unilateral authority on this issue. But anyway, let's neglect the RadarScope case, to start. You can't just say that because the data is PD, something you found from a random meteorologist on Twitter (who had to script said loop) is in the public domain. It's not made by some downloadable software, it's something they had to code. Saying it is public domain implies they have literally no rights over it (including the right to attribution), just because it uses a free data source. Master of Time (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Per the Wikimedia Commons, NEXRAD radar loops & all NEXRAD-related images are public domain. They made something using public domain data and even watermarked it with “NOAA” at the top. You are arguing something watermarked with the U.S. government isn’t public domain. The debates have already all been decided on the Commons. And you are right, an admin cannot “unilaterally” say something like that…However, that deletion discussion was a community consensus with even another highly-experienced Commons editor besides myself and the administrator commenting on it. In short — Anything NEXRAD related is in the public domain unless some aspect of the image/screenshot is directly copyrighted (chaser icon or something else along those lines). Anyone can make a radar loop, in fact RadarScope/RadarOmega/GR products can all make radar loops. Why should one radar loop (again, attribution watermarked with “NOAA”) be an exception to the U.S. government public domain rule? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- P.S. — Are you sure you want to open this can of worms? Any NEXRAD deletion means total NEXRAD deletion, including all radar images from every Wikipedia page (tornadoes, hurricanes, ect…). The Commons already decided they are public domain, so, at least in my mind, the topic was already formally decided in that deletion discussion. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Per the Wikimedia Commons, NEXRAD radar loops & all NEXRAD-related images are public domain. They made something using public domain data and even watermarked it with “NOAA” at the top. You are arguing something watermarked with the U.S. government isn’t public domain. The debates have already all been decided on the Commons. And you are right, an admin cannot “unilaterally” say something like that…However, that deletion discussion was a community consensus with even another highly-experienced Commons editor besides myself and the administrator commenting on it. In short — Anything NEXRAD related is in the public domain unless some aspect of the image/screenshot is directly copyrighted (chaser icon or something else along those lines). Anyone can make a radar loop, in fact RadarScope/RadarOmega/GR products can all make radar loops. Why should one radar loop (again, attribution watermarked with “NOAA”) be an exception to the U.S. government public domain rule? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) And I'll add on that your implication that something being in the public domain means all derivations must therefore be in the public domain isn't right. It wouldn't be PD if there were license restrictions. That's what PD is – no restrictions. The closest you could get would be maybe a Creative Commons license requiring that all derivations use the same license. A discussion involving three Wikimedia Commons users on a single file isn't the same as "Wikimedia Commons decided..." And my argument isn't to try to remove all radar images from Wikipedia or whatever you implied. Other than the aforementioned individual with the radar loop, I feel that RadarScope in particular just seems questionable considering they sell licenses which require annual payment. Master of Time (talk) 15:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- That administrator doesn't have unilateral authority on this issue. But anyway, let's neglect the RadarScope case, to start. You can't just say that because the data is PD, something you found from a random meteorologist on Twitter (who had to script said loop) is in the public domain. It's not made by some downloadable software, it's something they had to code. Saying it is public domain implies they have literally no rights over it (including the right to attribution), just because it uses a free data source. Master of Time (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- A comment and direct statement from an administrator on the Wikimedia Commons in that discussion: “
