Talk:Wind power

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wind power 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: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 2 months

Wind power was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 10, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed
November 10, 2021	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Environment: Sustainability High‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sustainability task force.

Energy Top‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Climate change Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change 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.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Physics: Fluid Dynamics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.

Mills High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mills, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mills 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.MillsWikipedia:WikiProject MillsTemplate:WikiProject MillsMills articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Wind turbine was copied or moved into Wind power with this edit on 17 August 2021. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Intermittent power sources#Terminology|dispatchable]] The anchor (Terminology) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Edit Request, Broken Link[edit]

There is a broken link on the "External links" section on the IEA's Dynamic Data Dashboard. It has been moved to a new domain which can be found here: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/renewables-2021-data-explorer?mode=market&region=World&publication=2021&product=Total

Could someone with access please update this? ~~ EnergyAnalyst2 (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are not able to update this article yourself? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:13, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is in requesting these edits that I seem to have gained access to edit them, I will correct that! Thanks for pointing it out. EnergyAnalyst2 (talk) 14:34, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should non-electricity be in History section?[edit]

@Ita140188 You tagged because “The article seems to be exclusively about producing electricity from wind power, but then history section talks about windmills and sails” so you think that should be removed from history? Or if not what do you suggest? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it should be removed from history and the page on history of wind power would explain it only. More can be included on the development of the electricity producing wind turbine over time and what companies were involved on the Wind Power page history section. Also, should the definition be revised to Wind Power is the process of generating energy from the wind as apposed to useful work? (the short description of the article is about producing electricity) Just my thoughts. Knowledgegatherer23 (talk) 00:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(or people involved) Knowledgegatherer23 (talk) 00:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can keep the information about historical use of wind power, but we need to be explicit from the lead that this article only deals with electricity production. The history section should then reflect this, briefly talking about pre-electricity uses but then focusing on the history of wind power for electricity production (which is mostly what it already does actually) --Ita140188 (talk) 09:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have excerpted - feel free to revert and solve the problem your way if you prefer Chidgk1 (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No legitimate source for the claim that Hammurabi had a plan to use wind power[edit]

I was interested in the information that Hammurabi might have used wind power and tried to find more details only to discover that every reference I found about this (on Wikipedia or otherwise) ultimately cites the 1976 book The Generation of electricity by wind power by E. Golding which has a single throwaway line about it and which itself only cites The Story of the Rotor by Anton Flettner from 1926, which has a single throwaway line with no source whatsoever.

the Golding book: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Generation_of_Electricity_by_Wind_Po/lRojAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Hammurabi

the Flettner book: https://books.google.com/books?id=W99NAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&vq=hammurabi&dq=flettner%20the%20story%20of%20the%20rotor&pg=PA95#v=snippet&q=hammurabi&f=false

I have only just created an account to post this and can't edit the page myself since it's protected, but it seems to me that this information has no real source and should be removed? If so can someone with access remove it? Minovi (talk) 15:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Economics and policy sections seem incomplete[edit]

In the current version, the 'Economics' section is very limited. It mentions costs but fails to mention the value of the electricity generated by wind power plant. I suggest adding a few sentences and linking to the 'Merit Order' page, which describes the value problem of variable renewable energy in detail.

Likewise, the content of the 'Central Government' subsection under 'Politics' is very limited and I also found it misleading. The references are almost exclusively referring to offshore wind. The first sentence seem to indicate that new installations are "generally subsidy free", but I believe this refer to offshore wind power only. I suggest rewriting this section completely, shift focus to both onshore and offshore wind power, and broaden the geographical scope. Tove-88 (talk) 11:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]