Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Files found with Special:Search/Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather[edit]

Tables, out of scope for Commons.

Yann (talk) 10:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete Per the nominator and my comments in the related ANU complaint. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol keep vote.svg Keep All weather stations from the United States and stations using NOAA data should be maintained and NOAA data are in the public domain.. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol delete vote.svg Delete However, the data of all non-U.S. weather stations may only be "fair use" in NOAA, because NOAA only reproduces the data of these regional weather bureaus. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 07:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Yann mw:Help:Tabular Data are useful. the data can be called by templates and modules across all projects.
mw:Extension:JsonConfig/Tabular "After a long discussion, it seemed Commons would be the best fit for such data and over 70% of the Commons community supported hosting tables on Commons."
you also voted support https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Proposals&diff=prev&oldid=193976454 . :) RZuo (talk) 08:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment there is now also related discussion in Commons:Village pump#Wrong_deletion. MKFI (talk) 08:15, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Tabular data and map data is perfectly in scope. One of the main scopes is to host content to be used on other Wikimedia projects and this data is meant to be used there. Otherwise we would need a total new Wikimedia project just for tables and map data. --GPSLeo (talk) 12:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GPSLeo: The problem isn't so much that it's "tabular data", it's that the data isn't sourced, lacks a description, no way to verify if it's correct, and can be edited by anyone at there whim to say whatever they want it to. Fumikas Sagisavas' says the data comes from individual weather stations and the "files" seem to be sourced to a website that contains information from weather stations, but realistically that's not a source for .tab file and it's ridiculous to expect people to parse out that (extremely obtuse if I'm being honest) website to figure out if the information in the tabular data is correct or not. Compare that to an image of a map where there's a description, source, and other relevant information that helps people to determine what exactly they are looking, the background of the file, where it came from, how accurate it is Etc. Etc. To the point that it's completely ridiculous, bad faithed analogy.
Also, the last time I checked Wikipedia articles can and do contain tables. I don't think they can load .tab files directly anyway. At least for articles about geographical locations the weather data is usually or always manually entered. So there's no reason this information can't just be added to whatever article in Wikipedia it's going to be used in and they can deal with the sourcing issues, verify that it's correct, fix the information if it isn't, Etc. Etc. That shouldn't be our job though. Just an FYI, I'd probably have a different opinion if .tab files weren't editable and contained the same summary information every other type of media does, but they are and don't have that information, which IMO is a problem and one that warrants the deletion requests. --Adamant1 (talk) 14:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Ncei.noaa.gov New York City" is an acceptable source. The long citation (XMACIS2; Northeast RCC CLIMOD 2, part of the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI).Downloaded using GHCN ID "USW00094728" (NY CITY CENTRAL PARK, NY).), that is of course missing on some of the pages, is even sufficient for a scientific article. As an example: The suggested citation for the German DWD is a text like "DWD Climate Data Center (CDC): Historical hourly station observations of 2m air temperature and humidity for Germany, version v006, 2018.". That is not such a huge difference. If you argue against the data because is could be vandalized or manipulated by the author we would have to close the hole project. GPSLeo (talk) 14:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure, but if someone goes to the "source" in Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather/New York City.tab it takes them to the main National Centers for Environmental Information website. Not the tab file or even an a page that contains it. That's like having an image that came from the NASA website, and instead of the source being the actual image it's just https://www.nasa.gov/. It might be fine for an un-editable image (even though I don't think it is), but we shouldn't expect people to have to search through a super obtuse website to verify that the information in the table is correct in real time (and correct it if it isn't) just because we can't provide a source to the actual file or at least the page it came from. That's not a "source." Nor is it within Commons' scope. Otherwise, how exactly is that any different then a Wikipedia article and/or someone doing research to write one? --Adamant1 (talk) 15:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_found_with_Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather&oldid=761916067"