Talk:Isles of Scilly

Discussion

ChatGPT produced this:

ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Under the Trewartha climate classification, the Isles of Scilly would not be considered subtropical. The Trewartha system refines the Köppen classification, emphasizing temperature ranges and growing seasons to delineate climates more precisely.

For a region to qualify as subtropical under Trewartha, it typically requires:

At least 8 months of the year with mean temperatures above 10°C (50°F), which is the threshold for warm-temperate or subtropical climates. Winters that are mild, with no significant frost. Isles of Scilly Climate Overview: The Isles of Scilly have a maritime climate characterized by mild winters and cool summers, heavily influenced by the surrounding Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf Stream. Mean temperatures for the warmest months (summer) are around 16–20°C (61–68°F), and for the coldest months (winter), they are typically 7–9°C (45–48°F). They likely do not meet the 8-month criterion for mean temperatures exceeding 10°C. Conclusion: The Isles of Scilly would be classified as oceanic (Do) in the Trewartha system, not subtropical. However, their exceptionally mild climate for their latitude gives them a subtropical "feel," especially in their flora and moderated seasonal changes. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 01:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

ChatGPT is not a reliable source, and is wrong here (about whether IoS meets criteria, not about the criteria itself). If you look at the daily means and count the months:

you can see that the Isles do meet the 8 month criterion. Uness232 (talk) 02:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

You've missed the point. The point is why would a large language model state those comments? What sources is it using. Have you tried interrogating Chat GPT to find out why? 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't know, and I'm not sure I particularly care. We don't use ChatGPT as a source in Wikipedia; it often hallucinates information. Uness232 (talk) 03:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

It provides sources, if you ask for them. BTW where did you get the "daily mean" figures for in your chart. They are not from the Met Office. The Met Office doesn't use 'daily mean' data. And have you checked which average calculation method Trewartha uses in his classification? Can you reference that? 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Please see the bars at the bottom of the table.

Met Officecis the source for all the data here. Except dew pointPAper GOL (talk) 14:43, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

But it's not frost free. You keep deliberately omitting the one criteria that scuppers your claims for Isles of Scilly, Budapest, Bordeaux and Istanbul. Have I missed any?Are there any more cities you intend to reclassify subtropical? 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I have never seen a verifiable source that says only frost-free climates can be subtropical. Not even the paper you provided said that; not even ChatGPT! You claim to have a copy of the 4th edition of Trewartha's book and that this information is only accessible in that edition, well that's just not verifiable! I have sources here. None of them mention this rule, conveniently; and I have a hard time believing Trewartha simply made this rule for his book's 4th edition, omitted it from everything else so that no modern source can back it up. Uness232 (talk) 03:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

It is verifiable - I have the book in front of me. Just because you don't, can't or won't verify the source (because it doesn't fit your fringe theory) doesn't mean it isn't verifiable. That's not how WP works. And do bear in mind you are basing you fringe theory on Trewartha's book - and it appears you haven't read Trewartha's book because if you had, you'd know full well it requires marine locations to be frost free! Go to a library. Read the book. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Show me the source which states that subtropical climates should be frost-free.

Because with your POV, even Houston is not subtropical because it experiences frosts.PAper GOL (talk) 14:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Trewartha's book states "marine climates in this category must be frostless" to be considered subtropical under Trewarth's classification. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 16:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Under what parameters is Houston not marine? Forget Houston, New Orleans wouldn't even be subtropical, as it also is not frost-free. Are you perhaps confusing frostless in a more technical sense 'does not have a month that averages a frosty night' (so no average daily low below 0C in any month), with the colloquial sense of frost-free? Because some tropical climates, like Miami, are also not frost-free! Being frost-free usually requires mean temperatures above 20C every month of the year: no subtropical climate can reach this, because at that point, they are past the tropical limit of 18C in the coldest month. Uness232 (talk) 16:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

(Trewartha, Glenn Thomas (1968). An Introduction to Climate. McGraw-Hill,. p. Ch: Subtropical climates, p341. ISBN 9780700651481.) 86.184.52.46 (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

• Are there any actual sources on the Isles of Scilly either way? Interpreting and applying general sources about climate classifications to a particular area is WP:OR. If there are no sources, the article should not state it either way. CMD (talk) 03:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Agreed! 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Chipmunkdavis Interpreting and applying general sources about climate classifications to a particular area is WP:OR. No, it is WP:CALC, because the calculation for these can be verified by anyone. See the source and verify it for yourself. Uness232 (talk) 03:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Applying climate classifications is not CALC, they are subjective and partially qualitative categories, as shown by there being multiple ways to classify them. I can't find anything in that source about the Isles of Scilly. CMD (talk) 03:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Agreed. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Chipmunkdavis No they are not, empirical climate classifications are entirely quantitative and not subjective, as long as which climate classification it is is clear. This is the case for every climate section: if we were to judge this as OR, we would have to remove climate categories from NYC, LA, and Paris. None of them have specific information as a source, but are sourced to the general rules of Köppen. Uness232 (talk) 03:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Those removals sound like a good idea. Paris isn't even sourced to that. CMD (talk) 03:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I don't think you understand. This would affect almost EVERY climate article. Madrid, Ankara, Beijing, Tokyo... the list goes on and on. It has been silent consensus for years that this is CALC, and this would be an insanely time-consuming change. I would at least start a different RfC for that. Uness232 (talk) 03:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  No, it would more likely only affect pages where dubious unsourced climate claims have been added based on WP:OR? This one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Budapest#Climate is a case in point. Surely you can appreciate it would be best practice to properly source climate claims using reliable third party sources from academic papers, climatologist, national climate bureaus etc, and not one editor's subjective calculations? 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Okay. Ignore all of my examples and arguments and just claim random stuff, great. I have not even changed half of these pages, and a lot of them have been stable for YEARS. Uness232 (talk) 03:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I do understand, I have seen climate OR added to many articles, and removed them at times, although I haven't clocked it as a widespread problem before. On this specific RfC, no source has been presented verifying that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical (or not). CMD (talk) 03:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  But we as editors who work on this do not consider it OR, and there is no reason for it to be OR because it is completely verifiable. See the short discussion over at Talk:Köppen climate classification#Lack of sourcing. And it is not a "widespread problem". I don't see how it is a problem because anyone can verify it. WP:CALC specifically states: Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the results of the calculations are correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources. Basic arithmetic, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age, is almost always permissible.

  Basic arithmetic is ALL that is required to determine a Köppen/Trewartha type (no subjective interpretation involved), and as long as the source for the rules are given, this falls squarely under WP:CALC. I can literally demonstrate if you wish. Uness232 (talk) 03:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's not WP:Calc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Isles_of_Scilly#c-Chipmunkdavis-20241119031300-Uness232-20241119031100 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Basic arithmetic is CALC, therefore it is CALC. Uness232 (talk) 03:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's not WP:Calc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Isles_of_Scilly#c-Chipmunkdavis-20241119031300-Uness232-20241119031100 . And it's not basic arithmetic since it's your interpretation of the data and the data has been cherrypicked. Find one RS source from a climatologist to back up your claim. If you can't, maybe that should tell you something. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  The reason for it to be OR is that there is no source. That link points to another instance of someone noting edits are unsourced. There is a wide gulf between calculating a person's age and the long explanation for the Kabul research provided in the linked discussion. CMD (talk) 03:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Chipmunkdavis Well, in every discussion prior to this, as long as the rules are sourced, this has been accepted as the "correct" way. Per WP:CONLEVEL, we are at the wrong place to discuss this. Uness232 (talk) 03:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  The right place to discuss this page is this talkpage. WP:V hasn't been met, let alone WP:DUE. CMD (talk) 03:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  How is WP:DUE even relevant here? Uness232 (talk) 04:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  DUE is relevant everywhere. The article is promoting a classification we have not found a single source for. CMD (talk) 05:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Please see my comments below. Uness232 (talk) 11:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  A quick trawl for sources:

  Marine west coast, warm summer climate (Classification: Cfb) https://weatherandclimate.com/united-kingdom/isles-of-scilly

  Oceanic, with quite mild, rainy winters and mild, relatively rainy summers.https://www.climatestotravel.com/climate/england/scilly#google_vignette

  According to the Köppen climate classification, the Isles of Scilly face a temperate Oceanic climate. https://www.worldatlas.com/islands/isles-of-scilly.html

  Marine west coast climate that is mild with no dry season, warm summers.https://www.climate.top/united-kingdom/isles-of-scilly/

  Oceanic climate (Köppen climate classification Cfb https://www.islesofscilly.uk/isles-of-scilly-weather/

  Summers are short, cool, and windy; the winters are long, cold, wet, and extremely windy. https://weatherspark.com/y/33762/Average-Weather-in-Isles-of-Scilly-United-Kingdom-Year-Round

  This climate, according to the Köppen climate classification, can be recognised as 'Cfb', signifying an oceanic climate. https://www.weather-atlas.com/en/united-kingdom/isles-of-scilly-climate#google_vignette

  Temperate maritime climate, characterized by mild temperatures, moderate rainfall, and relatively high humidity. https://www.worldweatheronline.com/isles-of-scilly-weather-averages/isles-of-scilly/gb.aspx#google_vignette

  Marine west coast, warm summer climate (Classification: Cfb).https://weatherandclimate.com/united-kingdom/isles-of-scilly/st-agnes#google_vignette 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  These are Köppen types. Nobody claimed IoS was subtropical per Köppen. Uness232 (talk) 04:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Again, you are deliberately missing the point. The point is, as I'm sure you are aware, there are no sources to support your claim that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical. No one has claimed this. Ever. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  The Business Insider article that you put in the article to claim that Ios is not subtropical, actively claims IoS to be subtropical. So yes, there are absolutely people who say this. Uness232 (talk) 04:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  You are again misrepresenting. I referenced the Business Insider as an example of how tourism has incorrectly labelled the islands subtropical. The Business Insider is perpetuating a myth with incorrect information. Likely sourced from Wikipedia! So sorry that particular nuance was lost on you. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  What? That is absolutely not how sourcing works on Wikipedia. You can not source something to claim its opposite. That is actual OR! Uness232 (talk) 04:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  No. That is an editor not reading an edit. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Reminder: You have nothing to back up your claim. You have no consensus. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Madrid, Ankara, Beijing, Tokyo all have frosts. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Not claiming any of those (except Tokyo) to be subtropical. Please read. Uness232 (talk) 04:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Good. Then they are not relevant to this discussion. Let's focus on getting you to add some sources to back up your claims that Isles of Scilly and Budapest are sub tropical. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I put them there to illustrate a different point, but they were absolutely relevant. Uness232 (talk) 04:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Word-salad. You have nothing to back up your claim. You have no consensus. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I see you are claiming New York has a humid subtropical climate. Can you provide a source for that? 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I am not. If it was up to me I would not call Scilly, NYC, Istanbul, Bordeaux etc subtropical. I am just trying to explain why they are so according to Köppen and/or Trewartha, which are empirical classifications with set calculations and set names for climates. This is how things have been done for more than a decade. Please understand. And if you want to change that, go to a more general venue and get consensus from the entire community: I wouldn't be against it. Uness232 (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  You claim "empirical classification with set calculations and set names for climates". And yet the mean temperatures in your chart are not sourced from the reference given? Your "set calculations" are in fact your WP:OR calculations. You've not even checked whether these classifications systems use mean, median or modal averages or referenced that fact. "This is how things have been done for more than a decade" - that's a flat Earth argument. Where is your consensus? Can you point to any other editor who agrees with you on any of the talk pages for any of these articles? 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  You've not even checked whether these classifications systems use mean, median or modal averages or referenced that fact.

  What? The papers for the rules of Köppen/Trewartha clearly state that they use daily means. You would know this if you've read any.

  Where is your consensus? Can you point to any other editor who agrees with you on any of the talk pages for any of these articles?

  Read WP:Silent consensus. Uness232 (talk) 03:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  So that's a no. You don't have any consensus. What I do see is you trying to rerun this discussion - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Budapest#Climate - where you did not gain consensus and your edits were not accepted by other editors. The arguments are exactly the same for this page as Budapest and all the other locations that have been raised. You have no consensus for your fringe theory, and all these fringe and unsourced "subtropical" climate claims should be removed. They are not provable and not encyclopaedic. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:38, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  (Also @Chipmunkdavis) Look at Talk:New_York_City/FAQ for example for some consensus, this has been around for years and solidifies that NYC's climate is subtropical per Köppen. I did not add this. I wasn't even around here when this was added. If you look at the talk page archive, many discussions have been started for this and they have all ended the same way. NYC is subtropical. I'm not representing any kind of fringe opinion, or trying to perpetuate a problem. This is simply how editors have done it, and they have reached consensus many times to do it this way. If you want to change that, per WP:CONLEVEL, you should take this to another venue. Uness232 (talk) 03:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  CONLEVEL does not apply as you have not pointed to a higher consensus. You have explicitly stated the supposed consensus is WP:SILENCE, the lowest possible level. CMD (talk) 03:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Chipmunkdavis No, I have pointed out many such instances in the archives of Talk:New York City, a much busier page than this one. See Talk:New York City/Archive 11#Koppen climate classification, Talk:New York City/Archive 14#Humid Subtropical Climate?. There are many MANY other examples from other pages that I can dig up. Uness232 (talk) 04:02, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Also Milan, here. Uness232 (talk) 04:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Those are also isolated article discussions, some back to before we had our current sourcing guidelines! CMD (talk) 04:05, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  So? I don't understand, why are we making this change only for IoS when this is a widespread problem that can be discussed? Why are we insisting on this talk page, right now? How is that good for the encylopedia? Uness232 (talk) 04:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I also still don't understand how you think WP:CALC does not apply when the rules of Köppen are provided, CALC literally states:

  Mathematical literacy may be necessary to follow a "routine" calculation, particularly for articles on mathematics or in the hard sciences. In some cases, editors may show their work in a footnote.

  I would say this counts as a hard science. Uness232 (talk) 04:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Improving this page is good for the encyclopaedia. There is no issue with mathematical literacy here, the issue is applying the classification system without a source, an act which involves zero arithmetic. CMD (talk) 05:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Chipmunkdavis How is there no source? I have given you a reliable source with the rules of Trewartha. All you need to do to get from the rules (which are set and unchanging) to a climate type is basic arithmetic, no other sources or interpretation required. Why is this so hard to understand? Uness232 (talk) 11:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  What isn't apparently understood is there is no reason to use Trewartha. Why do you want to use that source which says nothing about the Isles of Scilly on a page about the Isles of Scilly? CMD (talk) 13:17, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I don't want to. It's our only option for climate articles. No one writes an academic article for just one location while using an empirical climate classification (Köppen or Trewartha); it's just never done because it's so obvious and everyone can do it with a minute of work, so it will never get published. All we have for Köppen and Trewartha are regional and world maps with rules. We use these rules to classify climates, and then ideally inline cite the rules. This only takes some basic arithmetic. If you want specific sources for specific locations you have to go lower-quality, non-academic, not reliable, and often wrong and outdated. Ask any other editor engaged with this here whether they'd use something like weatherbase.com over an actual academic paper with set, quantifiable rules for climate classification, they will undoubtedly say no.

  As for why we are using Trewartha, it is the second most commonly used climate classification after Köppen. It is used in many academic journals (some of which I have linked here), it has been deemed to represent "zonal characteristics" better than Köppen, and even Britannica leads its article on climate classification article with the terms: "Köppen, Trewartha, Holdridge. It is a commonly used and accepted climate classification with set, verifiable rules. Uness232 (talk) 13:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  This is not a climate article, it is a general article about the Isles of Scilly. If nobody has bothered to write something relating to the Isles of Scilly, then that information probably shouldn't be here. CMD (talk) 14:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  You are being pedantic. What I meant was the climate section on virtually every general article is like this. I have given you 8 examples, you can go into List of largest cities and look for yourself, most of the busiest articles are sourced this way. Logically, do you want all of them removed? Do you want to discuss a general change where sources with climate class rules do not count as reliable sources? (we definitely can do that, but why are we talking about that here?)

  Furthermore, I am explaining to you why virtually no academic journal writes this just for IoS, or any other specific location/city. You ignore my argument again and again and again. Please, for once, WP:LISTEN. Uness232 (talk) 14:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  As I already stated above, OR should probably be removed from this or other articles. We don't need an academic article for climate classification, if that is your argument, I'm not sure why it has come up. If you want to discuss failing to get the point, please don't ask questions I have already answered. To repeat again, I am responding to the specific RfC here, about this particular article. If as you say you don't "want" to use the proposed material, don't use it. That would seemingly solve the dispute. CMD (talk) 14:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I still do not see how this would be OR, as it can be calculated using basic arithmetic with the inline source given. If no inline source is given then yes, it is OR; but otherwise? Seems WP:CALC to me. This is what I meant by WP:LISTEN; I'm saying that instead of discussing this here about Scilly, maybe we can start a different RfC about whether inline sources with rules should be sufficient sourcing for climate types. I would say yes, as somebody experienced in this, there is no subjectivity or interpretation here; it's just math, but you can argue something else and make your point.

  Also:We don't need an academic article for climate classification, if that is your argument, I'm not sure why it has come up.

  So what do we need? Low quality travel journalism that use their imagination as a method of classification instead of actual rule based classifications that form the basis of ALL of our climate pages (see humid subtropical, Mediterranean etc.) What if that low quality travel journalism doesn't even tell us what classification it is using, and suggests that Paris has a continental climate based on nothing? But when you read the continental climate page, you see no mention of Paris, and realize that, according to Köppen which the continental climate page is based on, continental climates should have a month below freezing, wouldn't you be confused? Wouldn't that seriously harm the encyclopedia? Uness232 (talk) 15:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Again, picking a climate system is not maths. It is not arithmetic. The maths is, presumably, identifying that there are "8 months of the year with mean temperatures above 10°C", but picking 8 months, picking 10°C, and then picking a classification system are not maths at all. As I have already answered the question I have apparently not listened to multiple times, including the immediately preceding comment, I have no interest in starting a different RfC, and I am responding to this one, about the text on this page. It would not seriously harm the encyclopedia to not include specific climate categories on pages for which we have no sources for their relevance, no. CMD (talk) 15:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Picking a climate system is not maths, but it is no different than choosing one source over another (or using both!), the same way we present notable historian's opinions, we present the systems of notable geographers. We know the systems are notable because they are used in published research (both Köppen and Trewartha are).

  but picking 8 months, picking 10°C, and then picking a classification system are not maths at all.

  Yes, which is why we have to cite the source for the rules of the climate classification and mention which climate classification we are using. If the climate classification itself is deemed not notable, that is a case by case discussion, but we are not picking anything within the climate classification. We are following the math guidelines in the source according to the set rules of a climate classification. I can only assume that you are not familiar with empirical climate classification at this point, because you are saying that we are picking 8 months. But we are not! Trewartha picked 8 months back in 1958, and we inline cite Trewartha's (or Köppen's) source to show the math that we did.

  Here is an example from Minneapolis:

  Minneapolis experiences a hot-summer humid continental climate (Dfa in the Köppen climate classification).

  This is sourced to Finlayson and McMahon, 2007, which provides the set rules of Köppen on pg. 4 (or 1636 on full original document). With these, and a simple bit of arithmetic, you can see that Minneapolis is in zone Dfa, a hot summer humid continental climate, as mentioned in the source. Now, this would also be problematic if we did not specify which climate classification we are using: but we do! We say, according to the Köppen climate classification, Minneapolis has a humid continental climate. Therefore, simply writing:

  Minneapolis experiences a hot-summer humid continental climate

  even if we use the Finlayson/McMahon source is OR. I accept that.

  But, as long as we:

  • Choose a climate classification that is used regularly in published research and is therefore notable.
  • Cite a source with the official rules of this climate classification, or an official map by the author if the climate classification is genetic instead of empirical.
  • Clarify which climate classification we are using alongside the text.
  • Make sure we have the data to verify on the page where the WP:CALC has taken place.

  This should not be, can not be OR, but rather WP:CALC, because we are explicitly stating which rules we have chosen and proving that these rules are notable by showing reliable sources that use these rules. WP:OR requires that original research be unverifiable. This is entirely verifiable and requires nothing more than a few mathematical solutions and some IF/THEN simple logic. Uness232 (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Your assumptions are incorrect. As for the rest, choosing a set of rules and carrying out an analysis is what actual researchers do. Bringing together multiple sources, one with rules of analysis and one with a new dataset to reach a novel conclusion is explicit WP:SYNTH. We should not present a historian's opinions about one topic on a different page to that topic. The systems of notable geographers should be presented on the articles covering those systems and geographers. CMD (talk) 17:33, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Your assumptions are incorrect.

  Care to explain?

  • Choosing a set of rules and carrying out an analysis is what actual researchers do.

  If by analysis you mean subtraction and addition, sure; but WP:CALC allows me to carry out basic math "analysis" that is verifiable by a source. Nobody is choosing a set of rules except for the geographers themselves; we are just applying the rules that are in common use; and the application of these rules involve only basic arithmetics, which fall under the basic calculation under WP:CALC. Choosing which system is going to be used is therefore not different from using the opinion of a certain mainstream historical scholar, but not being able to use all of them, which we do not need to do. All we need to do is present viewpoints fairly and with due weight.

  Also, if you think this is WP:SYNTH, what sources do we use for climate pages? And can you find me these sources? It doesn't seem like your proposition makes much sense in an applied, non-theoretical environment. Furthermore, you present this as a 'novel conclusion' but it really isn't. The rules already arrive to the conclusion that according to Trewartha, IoS is subtropical because the rules make the much more general claim that ALL places on Earth with 8-12 months of 10C or above temperature is subtropical. There is no novel conclusion here because there is no analysis: it really is just verbalizing what is already stated.

  Beyond all of this WP:NOTJUSTANYSYNTH and SYNTH is not ubiquitous, is relevant here. Your suggestion would wipe out the climate information on 90 percent of all city pages (many of which are reliably sourced, and can be easily verified by an editor, if you would try for once). Are you sure this is the appropriate way to use WP:SYNTH? Uness232 (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I don't care to explain the latest bad faith interjection. For a final time, we should use sources about the Isles of Scilly to write about the Isles of Scilly, and again, although it's not hugely relevant but seems important to the discussion, this is not a climate page. CMD (talk) 03:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  I don't know how to respond to you at this point. And I'm not sure if I should. But calling this disagreement bad faith without anything to back it up is blatant violation of WP:AGF, I'll say that much. Uness232 (talk) 13:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  SYNTH is when two or more reliably-sourced statements are combined to produce a new thesis that isn't verifiable from the sources.

  We have reliable source for a location's historical data.

  We have reliable source for the CALC.

  We can combine these two and reach a Cf classification for St. Mary's Island(not all the isles) in the last 30 year period(not all the periods). But since we don't have any verification for the Cf classification itself, it would lead to a possible SYNTH, while larger cities and areas have maps that show a classification for locations. (Continental for Minneapolis would be verified easily with a map).PAper GOL (talk) 09:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  @PAper GOL I see your point about St. Mary's Island; I agree that it would be ideal to clarify that this classification only applies to the island we have a station for, and other islands may not meet Trewartha's subtropical criteria.

  For the rest however, I do think you're mistaken:

  We have reliable source for a location's historical data. We have reliable source for the CALC. We can combine these two and reach a Cf classification for St. Mary's Island(not all the isles) in the last 30 year period(not all the periods). But since we don't have any verification for the Cf classification itself, it would lead to a possible SYNTH, (...)

  I don't think that this is true as SYNTH requires a new thesis. There is no new thesis here, it's just logical extension. As another example, let's take a hypothetical scenario. Let's assume that:

  • I, Uness232, am a member of the famous indie rock band "the Wikipedians". This is certain and is reliably sourced.
  • You get reliably sourced information that ALL members of "the Wikipedians" have been infected with COVID-19 and had to cancel their tour, but the article doesn't mention me by name.
  • You write this sentence: "Uness232, along with all other members of "the Wikipedians", was infected with COVID-19 and canceled their tour."

  No one would consider this synth, as it is just logical extension:

  IF all members of set A are true AND if set B is a subset of set A, THEN all members of set B are true.

  Similarly:

  • The source states that according to Trewartha, ALL stations with 8-12 months of 10C or above mean temperature are subtropical.
  • This station has 8 months of mean temperature above 10C.
  • Therefore, this station is subtropical according to Trewartha.

  This is a complete analogue of the other situation. No new thesis, just logical extension.

  while larger cities and areas have maps that show a classification for locations.

  They do, but they are often so low quality and low resolution that they conflict with station data (and the ones that aren't have to use generated model data to fill in the gaps, which causes problems, problems and more problems). If you remember the Budapest discussion, this map was used, which does not tell us its period or its resolution, and even if it did tell us its resolution it would probably be upwards of 100km. Budapest isn't even that large, never mind the Isles! Uness232 (talk) 14:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  You have no consensus here, and you had no consensus here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Budapest#Climate. And if you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Silent_consensus you'll see it's the weakeast form of consensus which falls away once there's a dispute. Which there is here and there was here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Budapest#Climate. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 03:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  New York isn't frost-free. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I agree. It also is not humid subtropical under Trewartha, with or without your supposed rule of a climate being 'frost-free' that you have yet to provide a full quote for. Uness232 (talk) 04:18, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  I provided you with the full quote earlier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Isles_of_Scilly#c-86.184.52.46-20241118234900-Uness232-20241118234400. Please don't misrepresent the discussion when it doesn't fit with your narrative - that's not constructive. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:20, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Which page is that from? -- for non-web sources pages are important. You give people a section, but no one will re-verify that like that. That goes against WP:V. Uness232 (talk) 04:23, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Read the chapter "Subtropical climates", pages 330-362. The specific quote in the link above is below the table on page 341. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Okay. Any wider context to the quote? Could you please share? I ask becasue this goes against every other source we have on Trewartha. Uness232 (talk) 04:28, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  READ. THE. BOOK. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  "goes against every other source we have on Trewartha".

  Calling that out as false.

  Back up that claim, please. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Okay, sure: (pg.4), , (pg. 118), (pg.5). All claim that the only requirement for subtropical is 8 months above 10C. No frost free requirement in any of these.

  At this point, I will need to take a break from this conversation, for a few hours. Feel free to read these if you are not convinced. Uness232 (talk) 04:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  There's nothing in your links to back up your claims that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical or help gain consensus for your fringe theory. And a reminder, your entire argument is predicated on Trewartha's Climate Classification, as described in Trewartha's book in which on page 341 he specifies that for subtropical classifications "marine climates in this category must be frostless". I appreciate this inconveniently demolishes your argument. However, your refusal to seek out and read the source, and instead insinuate it somehow doesn't exist - despite it being quoted in A Level text books and geography curricula around the world - and your persistent resorting to circuitous and unconstructive discussion does lead me to believe that perhaps you are not here to act in good faith. All you needed to do was source your claim... 86.184.52.46 (talk) 04:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  What?

  Sources in order, 1)

  3.2. Group C : subtropical climates

  In the C climate type there must be 8 to 12 months with a monthly mean air temperature of over 10°C and the temperature of the coolest month must be lower than 18°C.

  2)

  In the Trewartha scheme the “C” climate group encompasses Subtropical climates that have 8 or more months with a mean temperature of 10 °C (50 °F) or higher.

  3)

  C: Subtropical climates, 8-12 months above 10°C

  4)

  C: Subtropical climates, 8 to 12 months >10°C

  I have given you every possible source. I have sourced my claim four times over. I will be going for a bit now, but please do not act so WP:UNCIVIL. Uness232 (talk) 04:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  You’ve not provided a single source. 2A00:23C8:A70A:FE01:6971:CAFA:5EF5:EBDF (talk) 05:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  ^[4]

  This is the source. PAper GOL (talk) 14:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Check this source.^[5] The table in Page 4 clearly shows the criteria for C and D climate groups. Though I didn't check if it considers C group "subtropical".PAper GOL (talk) 15:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC) PAper GOL (talk) 15:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  It does, quote from pg. 3:

  3.2. Group C : subtropical climates

  In the C climate type there must be 8 to 12 months with a monthly mean air temperature of over 10°C and the temperature of the coolest month must be lower than 18°C. The subtypes are again based on the annual cycle of precipitation. Letters s, w and f have similar meaning as they do in the KCC. How- ever, in the KCC, the conditions are not based on precipitation totals during the winter (summer) half- year, but on the amount of precipitation in the wettest (driest) month of the season. Another difference is in the condition for subtypes, which is defined by an average annual precipitation of less than 89 cm, in addition to the driest summer month having less than 3 cm precipitation. Uness232 (talk) 15:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Doesn't mention Isles of Scilly. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 15:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Doesn't mention Isles of Scilly. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 15:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Okay, so you purportedly bring a source to the table saying "subtropical climates must be frost-free". It is not a problem for you that Trewartha's book does not specifically say, "subtropical climates must be frost-free, so the Isles of Scilly are not subtropical". But when we counter with the fact that that is NOT Trewartha's rule, your argument is that our sources do not mention IoS. Does your source specifically mention IoS being oceanic because it is not frost-free? Uness232 (talk) 15:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for raising this point. I’d like to address your argument step by step to clarify the issue and refocus the discussion on reliable sources and policy adherence.

  === The Role of Reliable Sources ===

  The standard for inclusion on Wikipedia is clear: any material added to an article must be verifiable and based on reliable sources. When making a claim about climate classification, particularly something as specific as "subtropical under Trewartha," the source must explicitly support that classification for the location in question—in this case, the Isles of Scilly.

  If no reliable source explicitly states that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical under Trewartha, such a claim cannot be included.

  === Clarifying the Frost-Free Criterion ===

  The sources I provided are reliable references that define the criteria for subtropical climates under Trewartha, including the requirement for frost-free conditions. This criterion is not an interpretation; it is explicitly stated in these sources.

  • These sources outline general rules for subtropical classifications, which are widely accepted within the framework of the Trewartha system.
  • If the Isles of Scilly are not frost-free, as evidenced by climate data, then the location does not meet the Trewartha criteria for subtropical climates. This is a straightforward application of the classification’s rules—not original research.

  === Your Argument ===

  You are suggesting that my sources must specifically state:

  "The Isles of Scilly are not subtropical because they are not frost-free."

  This is not how Wikipedia’s sourcing works. The criterion for inclusion is not whether a source explicitly states what the Isles of Scilly are not. The question is whether any reliable source explicitly states what the Isles of Scilly are in terms of climate classification.

  So far, there has been no reliable source provided that states the Isles of Scilly are subtropical under Trewartha. The lack of a direct mention in my sources does not make your claim valid; it only underscores that both claims—yours and mine—must meet the same standard of verifiable evidence.

  === Burden of Proof ===

  The burden of proof lies with the editor making the claim. If you assert that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical under Trewartha, you must provide a reliable source explicitly stating this. It is not sufficient to claim it based on your interpretation of climate data or general rules. This would violate the No Original Research policy.

  === Conclusion ===

  To summarize:

  • My sources define the general criteria for Trewartha’s subtropical classification, including the frost-free requirement. This is well-supported and reliable.
  • If you believe the Isles of Scilly meet this classification, you need a reliable source explicitly stating this.
  • The absence of such a source means the claim cannot be included, as per Wikipedia's policies.

  Let’s focus on finding verifiable, authoritative sources to resolve this matter constructively. Any claim must meet the same standard of reliability and evidence. 86.184.52.46 (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  To anwswer your question with sources specifically about the Isles of Scilly, this source discusses the Isles of Scilly, noting specifically that Tropical, not to mention subtropical, plants will grow in the open air only when they are not exposed to very low or great vicissitudes of temperature. Here is a short list of such exotics grown in these islands(p.190) and this source refers to it as the well-nigh semi-tropical Isles of Scilly (p.224), this source says Of course we cannot compete with Cornwall and the isles of Scilly, with their semi-tropical climate (p.429). While I am not sure about its applicability, this guidebook says the gloriously subtropical, unpolluted, and unspoiled Isles of Scilly don't really feel like part of England at all (p.50). Likewise, this book says from the sub-Arctic flow of Country of Caithness or the Caringorms to the sub-tropical Isles of Scilly. This Guidebook published by National Geographic likewise refers to at least some of the Isles of Scilly as a subtropical paradise (p.158). Brocade River Poems (She/They) 06:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  We are looking for reliable sources (RS) to support the claim that the Isles of Scilly climate is subtropical. Unfortunately, none of these sources are valid for that purpose. The first and second sources relate to plant types rather than climate. The third source's use of "well-nigh" suggests it does not quite meet the subtropical threshold. The RHS source is more promising but dates back to 1903, and it is unclear what evidence the claim relies upon. The DK book is a travel guide and therefore not a reliable source for a climate claim. The Max Adams book, while an excellent novel, is fiction and not a reliable source for climate claims. The National Geographic book is somewhat more promising, but the sentence in question is descriptive and does not specifically address climate classification.

  To reiterate, if climatologists accepted that the Isles of Scilly have a subtropical Trewartha climate, you would expect to find this reflected in multiple peer-reviewed papers, studies, and journals over the past 50 years. However, no such evidence has been found. I believe a significant claim such as this requires at least one high-quality, reliable source. The bar should be set high for climate-related claims.86.184.52.46 (talk) 11:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  By this standard of sourcing, no climate page would have a climate type. I understand why a travel guide should be rejected, but if using basic arithmetic on a climate classification with rules that are sourced inline is WP:OR and we want a proper academic source for every city, the Köppen type also needs to be removed, because no academic source will work singularly on IoS and get published. Uness232 (talk) 11:50, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for your perspective, but I think it's important to clarify the standards for reliable sourcing on Wikipedia, particularly when assigning climate classifications.

  1. Reliable Sources and WP : While it's true that many climate pages reference classifications like Köppen or Trewartha, they do so based on reliable sources that explicitly apply these systems to specific locations. Using "basic arithmetic" or making deductions from general rules constitutes original research (WP ), which Wikipedia expressly prohibits. The issue here is not the methodology of the Trewartha classification but the lack of a reliable source that applies it to the Isles of Scilly. Without such a source, any claim about its classification cannot meet Wikipedia's verifiability standard (WP ).
  2. Applicability of Policies: If no academic source directly addresses the Trewartha classification of the Isles of Scilly, then we cannot include such a claim in the article. This ensures Wikipedia reflects published, reliable research rather than editor interpretation. The same standard applies to Köppen classifications—if these are included without proper sourcing, they should also be reevaluated. Consistency across articles is important, but it must be grounded in policy, not assumption.
  3. The Core Issue: This is not about imposing unattainable sourcing requirements but about adhering to Wikipedia's principles of verifiability and avoiding synthesis or unsourced claims. If no reliable source explicitly classifies the Isles of Scilly as subtropical under Trewartha, the claim cannot remain.

  86.184.52.46 (talk) 12:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Max Adams' book is neither a novel nor fiction, what are you on about? The Museum Of The Wood Age is a nonfiction book by a Historian and Archeologist published by Bloomsbury. You can yell from the rafters about how some book requires something to do with whether or not frost exists all you like, unless it is a source that specifically says the Isles of Scilly are not subtropical, it isn't really applicable. Wikipedia represents what published sources say, which means that if there are a bunch of published sources that say the Isles of Scilly are subtropical, than it can be added to the article. Brocade River Poems (She/They) 12:29, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for pointing this out. While I understand your position, I think it's necessary to refocus on the need for proper, reliable sources in climate-related claims.

  1. Reliability of Sources: Whether or not Max Adams’ book is nonfiction is not the core issue here. The relevant question is whether it constitutes a reliable source (WP ) for the climate classification of the Isles of Scilly. As a book about history and archaeology, it does not meet the criteria for reliability when it comes to scientific climate classifications. Reliable sources in this context must come from climate experts or peer-reviewed publications that directly address the issue.
  2. Misplaced Burden of Proof: The claim that "unless there is a source that says the Isles of Scilly are not subtropical, the claim can stand" misrepresents Wikipedia’s standards. Per WP , the burden of proof lies with the editor proposing the addition. Without a source explicitly stating that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical under Trewartha, the claim should not be included. Absence of contradictory evidence does not justify the inclusion of an unverified claim.
  3. What Wikipedia Represents: Wikipedia reflects the consensus of reliable, published sources—not individual interpretations of data, nor the opinions of editors. If there are indeed “a bunch of published sources” stating that the Isles of Scilly are subtropical, these should be presented and evaluated for reliability and relevance. In their absence, the claim cannot remain.
  4. Verifiability and Responsibility: Claims about climate classifications must meet a high standard of reliability to preserve Wikipedia’s credibility. Allowing unsourced or poorly sourced claims undermines this. If no reliable source explicitly supports the claim under discussion, it must be removed, regardless of how plausible it might seem.

  86.184.52.46 (talk) 12:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)