Template talk:POTD/2011-08-21

Slightly misleading

The caption is a bit misleading. Looking at the original source: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=3510 it gives a better (albeit longer) explanation. It does not use the term "Wind wake" so not clear where that comes from. (Ah, it comes from http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Wake/ another source, not for this pic). It says the calmer seas show up as brighter on the right (Big Island and Maui), but darker on the left (especially notice the dark wake on Oahu). But the "elephant" not mentioned in the blurb is Kīlauea. The vog is probably the source of at least some of the "silver" on Hawaii island, which is noted in the source. Just not sure how to squeeze all this into the blurb. W Nowicki (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Vog is not mentioned in the IOTD page, so I would be hesitant about adding that in. howcheng {chat} 21:41, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Numeric precision

As the text is on the front page now, I may be too late to comment on it, but is there a source for the "wind wake" having an extent of 1,860 miles (2,990 km) with three significant digits? I would spontaneously doubt that the size of this phenomenon can be reliably estimated with such accuracy. Then I noticed 1,860 miles is also the distance given to the nearest continent, but it has been converted to 3,000 km. This makes me suspect that the actual conversion may have been performed the other way round, from the rough "3,000 km" with perhaps just one or two significant digits rounded off to the too precise equivalent of "1,860 miles", and then converted back to "2,990 km" with this (presumably unwarranted) precision. Am I missing something here?—SM5POR (talk) 13:04, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

The source [1] indeed says "3,000 km", which I think supports my interpretation above.—SM5POR (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done. howcheng {chat} 18:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)