Talk:Exometeorology

My Plans for Editing

Hello everyone! I am Nic and I will be helping update this article soon. I plan to add cited information primarily from The Exo-Weather Report by David S. Stevenson. Additionally, I will try to make the existing citations more concise or find alternatives from journals/other reputable publishers. Overall, I will be expanding the article and adding more sections to hopefully get it past stub-class. Feel free to contact me through Wikipedia if you want to discuss how to improve this article! Varmint256 (talk) 22:59, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Environmental Sciences

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2023 and 26 April 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Varmint256 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Dneal03.

— Assignment last updated by MethanoJen (talk) 17:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Evrik (talk) 05:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Artist's impression of HD 189733 b, an exoplanet with a wide range of observed exometeorological conditions.

• ... that meteorological phenomena, such as eastward winds blowing at speeds of 2 km/s (1.2 mi/s) around HD 189733 b (pictured), have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? Source: Louden, Tom; Wheatley, Peter J. (25 November 2015). "SPATIALLY RESOLVED EASTWARD WINDS AND ROTATION OF HD 189733b". The Astrophysical Journal. 814 (2): L24. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L24.
  • ALT1: ... that meteorological phenomena have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? Source: Louden, Tom; Wheatley, Peter J. (25 November 2015). "SPATIALLY RESOLVED EASTWARD WINDS AND ROTATION OF HD 189733b". The Astrophysical Journal. 814 (2): L24. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L24.
  • ALT2: ... that meteorological phenomena, such as wind speeds of 2 km/s (1.2 mi/s) around HD 189733 b (pictured), have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? Source: Louden, Tom; Wheatley, Peter J. (25 November 2015). "SPATIALLY RESOLVED EASTWARD WINDS AND ROTATION OF HD 189733b". The Astrophysical Journal. 814 (2): L24. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L24.
  • Reviewed: [[]]
  • Comment: Thank you for reviewing this nomination!

5x expanded by Varmint256 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Exometeorology; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Extremely intersting hook. Article and hook all meet criteria. Would say it could also run in a more concise ALT1: ... that meteorological phenomena have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? I only say this because this version might be even more interesting to general readers, but ALT0 is good to go, as is, already. QPQ just needs to be done and then it'll be greenlit. Could even run with this image perhaps? Soulbust (talk) 01:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Soulbust, thank you for the review; it's great to hear that you enjoyed the hook! Thanks for suggesting an alt hook and image as well. I'll add your suggested hook to the nomination, but I'd still like to include some facts in the hook instead of trimming them all out. How about ALT2: ... that meteorological phenomena, such as wind speeds of 2 km/s (1.2 mi/s) around HD 189733 b (pictured), have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? I guess that one is a tad more concise while still including the interesting fact. As for the picture, I'll add that to the nomination as well, but I need to add it to the article first. For QPQ, this is actually my first nomination for DYK (and one of my first article edits in general); I would still be happy to review another nomination to help out! Again, thanks for the review, and please let me know if I need to fulfill any other requirements! Varmint256 (talk) 03:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Varmint256: Sounds good! Didn't realize it was your first nom, so definitely good to go for the DYK section since QPQ can be waived here. The ALT0 or ALT2 both work. I would prefer ALT2 since it goes with the image, but all of these hooks work and I'll leave that up to the hook's promoter. Good job on this and the article! Soulbust (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Just edited the nomination according to your suggestions. Thanks again for the suggestions and approval, excited to see if it'll show up in DYK soon! Varmint256 (talk) 05:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Varmint256 and Soulbust: I have added the tags to the article. Bruxton (talk) 19:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton: Thank you for reviewing the article and nomination as well! I was going to address your concern, but I haven't yet seen any edits adding any citation needed tags to statements in the article. What statements/segments seem problematic? Varmint256 (talk) 19:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind, just saw your edit. I'll get to those citations soon. Varmint256 (talk) 19:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted to update; the past week has been busy for me, but I'm still working to get out those citations. Sorry for the delay. Varmint256 (talk) 21:14, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

@Varmint256: any progress? BorgQueen (talk) 18:56, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

@BorgQueen:@Bruxton: Finally was able to cite most of the statements and remove others, but there was one statement that I'm not exactly sure how to cite - the last sentence in the 3rd paragraph. By the definition of exometeorology, an exoplanet needs an atmosphere in the first place to have time-varying conditions in that atmosphere. However, I have not been able to find any studies that state that or contradict that in a peer-reviewed context. Thus, I wanted to ask you Bruxton - why did you add the citation needed tag to that sentence? Was there anything specific you hoped I could find to support that statement? Also, to everyone who reviewed my nomination, thanks for being patient. Is it still eligible for DYK if I can get all the citation needed tags taken care of? Varmint256 (talk) 05:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

• @Bruxton: ping. BorgQueen (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

I liked this nomination and it is a great image, but we cannot have un-cited claims WP:DYKSG#D2 and the nominator has had 1.5 months to correct the issues. If the sentences air circulation and weather patterns can only exist and redistribute a planet's heat if that planet has an atmosphere. Thus, an exoplanet's exometeorology depends on whether it has an atmosphere at all. cannot be cited it is an unresolved issue and the nomination remains stuck. Bruxton (talk) 14:22, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton: I am confused, how does Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue not apply here? It would seem that the existence of an atmosphere is a self-evident requirement for air circulation, and "weather" is defined as "the state of the atmosphere". Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for the clarification! Will continue searching for citations or remove the statements if necessary. Varmint256 (talk) 00:59, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

So we can’t say an atmospheric function on earth applies to other planets. That sentence might need to be removed then. At some point if a source can’t be found and the sentence isn’t removed this will fail. 75.99.8.58 (talk) 23:23, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

• Can we please fail this? The outstanding issue hasn’t been corrected, and the nomination has now been open for 2.5 months. 75.99.8.58 (talk) 22:56, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay (again), I'll try to verify the statement by tonight. If I cannot, I understand that I have had an extended amount of time and the nomination might need to be failed. Thank you all for allowing the extra time.Varmint256 (talk) 23:28, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton:@BorgQueen: Alright, I attempted to fix the last citation needed tag in the article by citing a NASA article that states planets need a significant atmosphere to support weather and its causes. Beyond that, I'm not sure what else I can add to support the statement - I kind of side with Maury's comment. However, if it is not enough, I can try to find more evidence. Again, thank you all for the extended nomination period - I hope this makes it worth it! Varmint256 (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

• Confirming issue has been resolved, using a NASA cite. This fascinating article is likely going to be this month's leader, let's get this done. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
  • @Varmint256: could you tell me which sentence in the source backs up the hook? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
  • @Theleekycauldron: From the cited source on arXiv, "Subtracting these expected rotational velocities from our measured equatorial velocities we find the velocity of the leading limb is consistent with tidally locked rotation (super-rotation of −0.6 (+1.3 −1.5) km s−1), but that the trailing limb has an eastward excess velocity of 2.4 (+1.0 −1.4) km s−1 (68% confidence errors)." and "For comparison with the unresolved studies, our limb-averaged velocity offset is 1.9 (+0.7 −0.6) km s−1 (Figure 3)". The authors explain in the discussion and conclusions that they interpret these velocities (1.9 and 2.4 km/s) as evidence of the speed of an easterly jet around the planet's equator, given that there is evidence for eastward equatorial winds on the planet already. My figure, 2 km/s, is within the uncertainties of both of those velocities and is what most news sources rounded to when publishing the discovery. I also figured that ALT1, which just says "meteorological phenomena," is broad enough to include winds as well. Does that support the hook well enough?
  • Just adding another comment to notify anyone watching the nom. I'll be happy to cite anything else that needs to be supported in the article, but is the article as it is good for DYK? (Also forgot to sign that last comment - whoops!) Varmint256 (talk) 03:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
    • Not signing means you don't ping, Varmint256. theleekycauldron... ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
      • @Varmint256: awesome – if we're just gonna use '2' for the km/s, shouldn't we only use one sig fig for the converted figure? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:39, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
        • @Theleekycauldron: Sorry for the oversight! As opposed to shortening the 1.2 mi/s to 1 mi/s, could we extend the original figure in each hook to 2.0 km/s - since that would still be in the margins of error and retain the 2 significant digits from the given figures in the paper? (Came up with this idea from a cited sentence in significant figures explaining how to handle uncertainty.) Varmint256 (talk) 03:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
          • @Varmint256: sounds good, but if that's the case, why not just do 1.9? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
          • @Theleekycauldron: We can certainly do that if that's the better move. I was hoping to keep the 2.0 km/s to best align with news sources and popular interpretations of the study. Plus, I cannot really tell whether a "limb-averaged velocity offset" of 1.9 km/s exactly equates to an eastward jet speed of 1.9 km/s; I am still kind of new to reading and interpreting scholarly articles. If it would be best to change the figure to 1.9 km/s and keep the conversion at 1.2 mi/s, then I'll be happy to change the hooks and the figures in the article. (P.s. do you want me to keep pinging? Sorry for blowing up your notifications!) Varmint256 (talk) 04:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)