Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Solar energy/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 19:13, 4 July 2008.

Solar energy

 * Self-nominator : Mrshaba (talk)

I'm nominating this article for featured article because the page seems to be getting there. I'm not sure where there is but the page has gone through a few rounds of peer review/copy editing and I'd like to get a feel for where it stands. Mrshaba (talk) 22:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Transcluded at 16:13, June 24, 2008 Sandy Georgia (Talk) 22:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment The first two paragraphs in the lead could probably be merged together as they both define the scope of the article. Gary King ( talk ) 00:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Response Merged. Mrshaba (talk) 16:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following reliable sources? (note that some are quite likely reliable, I'm not an expert in the field of solar energy, so can't judge easily)
 * http://eetd.lbl.gov/HeatIsland/
 * Maintained by Lawrence Berkeley Lab Scientists. I have a book source (Cool It by Lomborg) but it references the site too
 * http://www.patentstorm.us/
 * http://www.solare-bruecke.org/
 * This is Scheffler's site. He created the technology
 * http://www.azsolarcenter.com/index.html
 * Removed
 * http://gadhia-solar.com/index.htm
 * Scheffler info is hard to come by. Dr. Gadhia's site is commercial but it does a good job of covering several projects.
 * http://www.rebootnow.org/can.shtml
 * Removed
 * http://www.sodis.ch/
 * http://www.solarbuzz.com/index.asp
 * I wouldn't use them for stories but the PV price info they provide is the best I know of.
 * http://www.nyecospaces.com/2007/09/photovoltaics-getting-cheaper.html
 * http://www.plentymag.com/features/2006/11/sand_trap.php
 * http://www.isracast.com/index.aspx
 * Replaced with a Weiztmann Institute of Science ref
 * http://www.greencarcongress.com/
 * http://www.emarineinc.com/products/mounts/tracker.html
 * http://www.speedace.info/index.htm
 * World Solar Challenge site is unreliable. This site had the same info.
 * I contacted the World Solar Challenge webmaster who told me the site gets reworked biannually for each race. The webmaster suggested I use the Wayback archive site to retrieve the info but I'm not sure this is kosher for Wikipedia. Mrshaba (talk) 05:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.schueco.dk/pdffiles/049/1410P2637.pdf
 * section removed
 * http://www.umwelteinsatz.ch/IBS/solship2.html
 * http://www.vectorsite.net/twuav_15.html#m7
 * http://www.space.com/
 * http://www.agust.com/energy/Pumped_Storage.pdf
 * http://inventors.about.com/od/timelines/a/Photovoltaics_2.htm
 * http://www.greentechmedia.com/reports/research-report-solar-power-services.html
 * http://www.ens-newswire.com/
 * Current note 1 (Energy and Inspriation link) is lacking a publisher and last access date for the source link.
 * This picture has been a long term issue but it looks like it will finally be removed.
 * Who is ASHRAE? And SANDEC? DOE?
 * I expanded these
 * The following refs are lacking publisher and last access date at the very least.
 * http://www.intute.ac.uk/sciences/timeline6.html (current ref 54)
 * http://www.nyecospaces.com/2007/09/photovoltaics-getting-cheaper.html (current ref 71)
 * http://www.plentymag.com/features/2006/11/sand_trap.php (current ref 72)
 * http://www.solarbuzz.com/Photos/moduleprices08-6.gif (current ref 73)
 * removed
 * http://www.solarbuzz.com/News/NewsASMA155.htm (current ref 74)
 * removed
 * http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bown/2007/green/item_59.html (current ref 75)
 * http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1813954,00.html (current ref 76)
 * removed
 * http://www.greentechmedia.com/reports/research-report-solar-power-services.html (current ref 106)
 * http://www.nellis.af.mil/news/nellissolarpowersystem.asp (current ref 107)
 * Otherwise sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:06, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Space.com, the Time magazine article and the Nellis Air Force Base article are all reliable sources. Can't speak for the rest of them, though. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note that if you want, you can reply beneath my notes above. In fact, I encourage it, it makes it a lot easier for me too. Just indent the responses. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:33, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I cannot find any "reliable" sources for info on solar boats or solar balloons. I think this info should be included but the history of these technologies is maintained at the hobbyist level and the sites tend to be a little cheesy. Any advice? Mrshaba (talk) 05:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  20:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments Seems like a good, well-researched article. Just come comments for the beginning of the article. If I have time, I'll take a look at the entire page.
 * Given the length of the article, I'd like to see the lead expanded a little.
 * I think we are going to rewrite the intro entirely.
 * I don't really like the first sentence. I'm sure most people can determine what the term "solar energy" is without knowing a thing about it, and currently, it bascially says "Solar energy is energy that is solar".
 * As I described below, I've had a hard time getting solar energy experts to describe what solar energy is. There's an issue with synonyms and the fine line between resource and technology.
 * In building design, thermal mass is used to conserve heat, and daylighting techniques optimize light. doesn't read well.
 * The absorption of solar energy by atmospheric convection (sensible heat transport) and evaporation and condensation of water vapor (latent heat transport) powers the water cycle and drives the winds. Do we really need a link to wind?
 * The link to wind seems to balance the link to the water cycle but I can take it or leave it.
 * Sunlight absorbed by the oceans and land masses keeps the surface at an average temperature of 14 °C. needs a conversion.
 * Per MoS, prose-ify that choppy in-text list.
 * This seems like a linear comparison that is better left to a bulleted list. I removed all other bulleted lists from the page but this one seems to make sense.
 * Prose could use an all-around copyedit.
 * Yep
 * The first two paragraphs of Applications of solar energy technology need references.
 * Throughout the article, I'm seeing short, start-and-stop sentences.
 * When these features are tailored to the local climate and environment they can produce well-lit spaces that stay in a comfortable temperature range. seems POVish. What is a "comfortable temperature range"?
 * "Comfortable temperature range" is inherently subjective and involves both physiological and psychological factors. I can provide a source that roughly defines what a comfortable temperature range if you think this would help.


 * Alright, let me know when you get done working on those. Per WP:UNITS, Conversions to and from metric units and US or imperial units should generally be provided. However, temperature conversions are not required. I added cn to a few statements that I believe need sources in that section, and a couple more in other places. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  21:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Sigh, I'm afraid an edit war is interrupting this process. This will have to wait. Mrshaba (talk) 17:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose, criterion 1e. Sorry, but I cannot support at the time with an ongoing war. It appears there might be a potential 3RR violation, as well. Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  18:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment I've got a couple of articles in line before this one, but I hope to get here soon with a copyedit. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 13:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It seems fairly comprehensive and readable. I only have a few remarks:
 * "may be characterized as" seems passive and possibly weasely. More direct language would be better.
 * Article should explain "Scheffler reflectors" where it is first mentioned, rather than in the "Cooking" section. Also, please clarify "leach mining".
 * I moved the sections around so the Scheffler description comes before the mention of scheffler reflectors in the process heat setion. I'll look for the pdf that talked about the use of evaporation ponds in association with leach mining. Essentially it said a lot of water is used in leach mining and these ponds are used to remove impurities from this water.
 * To me it does no good to list the various still designs without explaining what they mean. Also, what is a "hybrid modes" still?
 * Hybrid is a mix of passive and active. I'll see about making the blurb more generic.
 * Could you make the article answer the question?
 * There are multiple paragraphs that could use citations, such as the first paragraph of "Solar electricity".
 * Please tag some of these. I generally can't see where refs are needed although I'll get the power plants mentioned in the solar electricity section.
 * Done.&mdash;RJH (talk) 14:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * As a suggestion you could mention proposals for orbital solar energy collection and the use of orbital mirrors for night time illumination (including military purposes and for high latitude sites).
 * Added an SPS blurb.
 * Thanks.&mdash;RJH (talk) 22:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments Solar Thermal needs a bit more text to summarise the linked main article or at least to include all of the applications listed below the heading.
 * Some commonality of terms is needed, for instance under Solar Electricity the term 'Concentrating solar thermal devices' is used, but in the subheading below it, and its text meant to describe this 'Concentrating solar power' is used. Jagra (talk) 09:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Concentrating solar power used consistently. Mrshaba (talk) 13:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose—1a. Let's get the microscope out and look at the lead. This shows just how much work is required by a proper copy-editor. TONY  (talk)  14:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Solar energy and solar power are not synonymous, as is explained in the very place this is claimed, and implicit in the different meanings of "power" and "energy". The Sun itself doesn't radiate solar power, does it?
 * The underlying problem here is the widespread misuse of the terms "power" and "energy". This leads to the terms solar power and solar energy being used interchangeably. A more specific description of "solar power" is the conversion of sunlight into electricity. I'd like to see this definition used but there's been resistance to this idea. SEE: here. Harold Hay also uses this more explicit definition but in general the terms are mishmashed. The Sun is akin to a generator so power or specific power is the better unit of measurement - 383 yottawatts (3.83 W).
 * "Various", like "some", "a range of", and "any" should be questioned every times it appears.
 * Unidiomatic use of "or" rather than "and" in the opening para.
 * Concentrating devices? Huh?
 * I'm not sure what the issue is here. Lenses and mirrors are used with both photovoltaics (Concentrating PV - CPV) and solar thermal (CST) applications so referring to concentrating devices alone misses the point.
 * How does one use solar energy in an uncontrolled manner?
 * Nuclear reactions happen all around us but a controlled nuclear reaction is a nuclear reactor. Control is the most important factor when it comes to solar energy because there's a difference between conscious use and unconscious use. Windows alone are not a solar energy technology but when overhangs, louvers or switchable glass is used to control how much light comes in you've got a solar energy technology. If you build a home with a high proportion of window area to thermal mass the house will uncontrollably overheat. Glare and perhaps sunburns also fall into the uncontrolled category.
 * Comma after "sectors".
 * Larger solar kitchens: larger than what?
 * Larger than family scale solar cookers. This is explained in the cooking section.
 * Hyphen missing somewhere in Para 3. Can you see where?
 * materialS testing
 * All the journal articles refer to material testing rather than materials testing. "High temperature-high flux material testing for solar flux applications" Solar Energy Vol. 23, pg 175-181 I guess they missed the high-temperature hyphen too.


 * Summarizing this topic is challenging because it does not have a consistent technical vocabulary. I'm not happy with the lead either but I'm sensing some sarcasm. Fair enough though... learning has occurred. Mrshaba (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.