Talk:North American monsoon

Controversy
Perhaps not so much controversial as debatable, but many meteorologists do not consider the NAM to be a genuine Monsoon. Ramage in his definitive 1971 book excludes the region from his global monsoons. The reasons for this is that a complete wind reversal does not occur, and that the north American continent is too much dominated by migrating cyclones and anticyclones - whereas the Tibetan Plateau is basically in summer an area of stationary low pressure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.154.148.1 (talk) 08:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * So funny! A good example of US 'what-about-us-ism'.  Imagine the shame of not having an actual monsoon to boast about. Of course, the US doesn't have an actual monsoon, just a pathological fear of not being significant, by whatever measure.

I agree, the "NAM" is not recognised as a legitimate monsoon by anyone except Americans so why should it have its own article? This US-centric bias is Wikipedias huge downfall, it seems to show a certain conceit to the rest of the world. This article has no place or relevance. 101.103.189.167 (talk) 14:32, 21 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Added section on whether this is a "true" monsoon. There still appears to be controversy over the exact definition of monsoon (is a 90 degree seasonal shift in winds enough?), but only one RS was saying it was not, while the rest were saying it was. — hike395 (talk) 14:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Merge Proposal
This article is largely copied from the NOAA website. The North American Monsoon section of the Monsoon article has nearly as much information as this article, but worded differently and with some other useful insights. With the existence of this article, much of the information in the North American Monsoon section in the Monsoon article should be merged into this article,. This will eliminate a lot of duplication. Rsduhamel (talk) 01:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree: I'll attempt an edit. hike395 (talk) 08:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I really like this article. The slight informality of its writing is more than repaid by its clarity and flow. Please don't edit out good bits like the parenthetical aside about never camping in dry washes (an important datum), or the vivid and useful term "green up." --TNH, 22 June 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.244.76.130 (talk) 21:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

My concern with your article is that you take sentences verbatim from the NOAA site without quotation marks. You would do far better to put the concepts in your own words. Report writing that commits your error is considered plagiarism in many places, and if not plagiarism at least poor writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nomenclat (talk • contribs) 19:05, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

North American Monsoon Panoramas
In July 2006 I added a panorama of the NAM from El Cajon, CA to the article. Since then I got a better camera and in August 2008 I got some much-better pictures of the monsoon. I think these pictures give a unique perspective because you can actually see the monsoon from clear skies about 30 miles away. This is possible because the monsoon is blocked from the coastal strip of southern California by the Peninsular Range. I picked the best of these pictures and put it in the article. However, I have several excellent pictures that may look better to some people. I am showing the pictures below to see if there is a preference as to the best one to put into the article.

Image:North American Monsoon 20060704 Ramona.jpg



I resized these pictures for convenient viewing. They are about half the original size. If anyone requests I'll upload the full-sized versions. Rsduhamel (talk) 06:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)