Talk:La Niña

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 13 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cocoapuffs212. Peer reviewers: Sintegral, Niquekaaa.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

this sucks it won't tell me what happens during the la nina —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.80.106 (talk) 23:07, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, there is a lot of unsupported statements being made by various sources, and it is not easy to determine which are credible enough to be cited in an encyclopedia. Also, global weather is complex and it is often hard to find out what causes what exactly, even to scientists. However, I do not agree with your claim - there is an explanation of what La Niña means: lower equatorial sea surface temperatures in the Pacific - and there also exists a section on known effects of La Niña. If you have suggestions for improvement, you're welcome, but I do not see your point. What do you want to know on "what happens" besides the information that is already there? Andreas Willow (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
La Nina is simply a definition based on ocean temperatures. You either meet the definition or you do not. The article here fairly succinctly indicates how taht affects the jet stream... The jet stream affects weather. Pretty straightforward stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.68.248 (talk) 02:53, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't actually mention how it affects the jet-streams.109.149.80.240 (talk) 13:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mokiki vs. Modoki[edit]

In the main ENSO article I can only find the term Modoki and not Mokiki: Is this a typo or something different? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.96.14.101 (talk) 09:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am a little afraid the "Mokiki" adjective may have been a case of sophisticated vandalism. Try looking for the word with Google Scholar. You will find no relevant ENSO related papers with the term. However it is a surname which makes me suspect the reason for the prank. --Friendly Neighbour (talk) 10:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked this. Both instances of "Mokiki" phenomena were added by anonymous editors, the first by one with a history of nonconstructive edits, namely user 72.40.1.69 (talk · contribs). This very user also tried to squeeze the term into the main ENSO article (as inverse of El Nino Modoki which is incorrect as that would be La Nina Modoki) but was reverted. --Friendly Neighbour (talk) 11:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Effects of La Niña[edit]

"La Niña causes mostly the same effects of El Niño, for example, El Niño would cause a wet period in the Midwestern U.S., while La Niña would typically cause a dry period in this area." (My italics.)

Please clarify this, since it contradicts itself. Do we get opposite effects or same effects of El Niño? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.135.51 (talk) 18:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation[edit]

How is this word pronounced? I know how the Spanish term is pronounced. Is it the same in English? --Lee (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to the OED, in UK English, 'Niño' is pronounced
  • n: n as in nine
  • i:ː ee as in bean
  • n: n as in nine
  • jəʊ: yoe as in yoga
The OED records that the US pronounce it the same except that the 'í' is as in 'Happy'
--Senra (talk) 09:30, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of the phrase[edit]

This article says 'La Niña' originates from Spanish meaning 'Little Girl' analogous to 'El Niño' meaning 'Little Boy'. The El Niño article says that 'El niño' means 'The boy' and the capitalised term, 'El Niño', refers to the Christ child, Jesus. Which is right?

--Senra (talk) 09:21, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Both, actually. The words "el niño" are spanish for "the boy." "El Niño" is a title for the child Christ (similar to how adult Jesus is referred to as "The Lord" in English) and is what those weather conditions were named for. La Niña, meaning "the girl" was named in analog to El Niño taking not the religious meaning of the name, but the everyday meaning (similar to how "the lady" is the female analog to "the lord").
Gunblader928 (talk) 18:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on La Niña. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on La Niña. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:01, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2016 and 2017 La Niña events[edit]

The article makes reference to 2 seperate La Niña events in 2016 and 2017. While there were months with La Nina conditions both years, I believe neither year qualified as having a full fledged La Niña.

I read the reference links and I don't see any formal declaration of a La Niña. What I see primarily is a forecast of a possible La Niña.

Either better references need to be added, or those 2 years need to be removed.

Gregfreemyer (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

JMA acknowledges the 2017-18 one. NOAA/CPC acknowledges both. ABC paulista (talk) 00:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of La Niña Events[edit]

I edited the list of La Niña events in the Background section, and had my edit undone by @ABC paulista:. I believe this is an error. If, however, I am mistaken, then the chart at the beginning of the section needs to be corrected. It shows 1995-1996 as being a La Niña event. Either way something should change as the two are not consistent.

According to the NOAA Analysis[1] 1994-1995 was an El Niño season. This is also shown as an El Niño season in the chart of events on that wiki. The other reference[2] linked on the page also suggests 1994-1995 was an El Niño. I believe my initial edit to be correct. Is there a reference that contradicts this?

This is my first edit and first "talk." Apologies for any breaches of protocol. Mattparrilla (talk) 23:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Mattparrilla: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for catching 1994-95 was an El Nino year rather than a La Nina season like this article suggests.Jason Rees (talk) 01:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mattparrilla and Jason Rees, my bad. I read it wrong, I thought this was the El Niño page. ABC paulista (talk) 16:23, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ABC paulista: How would you feel about us tweaking the timeline in all 3 articles to cover both La Nina and El Nino episodes. I have worked something rough out here based on the references we have but am not 100% happy with it.Jason Rees (talk) 16:59, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jason Rees I like the format, but which databases did you use as inputs? ABC paulista (talk) 21:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The main data came from the BoM's list of episodes but was tweaked with JMA and NOAA data.Jason Rees (talk) 22:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jason Rees, any reason to give more weight to BoM's data over the others? ABC paulista (talk) 03:03, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not particularly bar the fact that it goes back further and includes more ENSO episodes then the JMA/NOAA do on their lists. I will also note that I think I have tweaked it enough for their not to be any weight issues per say.Jason Rees (talk) 03:47, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jason Rees, that's okay for me then. My worry was on how the databases should be combined (whether consider instances only when all 3 agencies acknowledges them, or consider as long as at least one acknowledges them, for example), but if you found a suitable compromise between them, I'm good. ABC paulista (talk) 13:51, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ABC paulista: My view is that if we went for instances when all 3 databases/lists showed that El Nino existed, then we would miss several events and would have to remove events when we find databases or lists from other areas/weather agencies (Eg: Peru, Meteo France). I Personally I wonder if i should add in significant periods of neutral conditions.Jason Rees (talk) 14:52, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Rees, there are other databases other than these 3 ones? AFAIK, all other indexes/databases are derived from these 3 ones. About the significant neutral events, I don't think it's necessary, since all blank spaces between ENSO events means neutral conditions. They are already visible without being necessary to point them out. ABC paulista (talk) 15:09, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
While I am not aware of any other databases/lists, I would be very surprised if either Meteo France or Peru MetServices didn't have a publicly available list of events after all "each forecast agency has different criteria for what constitutes an enso event, which is tailored to their specific interests". As a result, I will drop them an email to see what i can find.Jason Rees (talk) 15:54, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Create Page for La Nina that Started in 2020[edit]

We are in an ongoing La Nina, which started in 2020. I'm surprised that no one has created a page for it yet. Should one be created, or are we waiting for the event to finish first? PhiEaglesfan712 (talk) 09:49, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A page can be created as long as there's enough coverage and infromation to prove its notability. If no one did it yet, then I assume that's not the case currently. ABC paulista (talk) 16:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You either haven't been paying attention or are a climate change denier if you don't think there is enough coverage and information to prove its notability. The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season was the most active on the record, and 2021 was also one of the most active on record. There is also the drought/wildfires in California. There are more than enough extreme weather events since the La Nina formed in 2020 to create the article. It's a matter of when we are going to create, and how we are going to put this together. The longest La Nina of the 21st century isn't going to be left without an article. PhiEaglesfan712 (talk) 12:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@PhiEaglesfan712: First of all, please be WP:CIVIL and WP:Assume good faith. Also, if you believe that there's enough notability and coverage on the subject, then go for it. Wikipedia:Be bold. Just remember that causation must also be sourced, we can't assume that there's a correlation between phenomenas just because they're occurring concurrently. ABC paulista (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://origin.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ensostuff/ONI_v5.php
  2. ^ http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/enlist/index.shtml

Two La Niña's?[edit]

In the background section, it says that there are two La Niña's between 2020 and 2023: 2020–21 and 2021–23. What's the source for this and why does one La Niña end and another one start in the same year? RandomInfinity17 (talk) 22:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking the background section is based on a blend of data from the JMA, NOAA CPC, Australian BoM and IRI. When I look at NOAA CPC's data in particular I notice that they think the La Nina of 2020-21 weakened for approxmiately two 3 month pierods. This is backed up by the JMA who thinks that the Summer of 2021 contained neutral conditions as opposed to La Nina. I dont know how @ABC paulista: feels about this but if the data is there to combine the two events then I dont have a problem with doing so.Jason Rees (talk) 00:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RandomInfinity17: Like Jason Rees said, in most of the indexes used on the sourcing of these events there's a gap in between these events, so for now they are to be considered separate events since no source presented stated otherwise. But, like the 2010–2012 La Niña event, if there's more reputable sources that do consider it to be one continuous event, then they should supercede the indexes. ABC paulista (talk) 03:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When I looked at some sources it was described more like the 2020-2023 La Nina event with a brief break in the summer of 2021. They didn't really say it was two La Ninas. Also there is a strange new article that should be merged here at 2020-2023 La Niña event. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:02, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The 2020-2023 La Nina event is notable enough to have an article, it's just that it is currently a stub. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 14:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said before, if the 2020-2023 La Niña event article becomes well developed and brings enough sourcing to supercede the official ones, then I would have no objections. For now, the most reliable ones that were presented there stated that the La Niña took "a little break" in 2021, which partially corroborates with how this(ese) are currently presented here. ABC paulista (talk) 16:27, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merged into El Niño–Southern Oscillation[edit]

I've just merged this article into El Niño–Southern Oscillation, as per the discussion on the talk page there. EMsmile (talk) 16:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:La_Niña&oldid=1197683621"