Talk earth – simple english wikipedia, the free encyclopedia electricity bill cost per unit


Most ecologists would say that there is an Earth-Moon ecological system, and that tides, and f gas regulations to a much lesser degree phases (which affect the light received at night, which in turn affects animal hunting patterns and etc.), are critically important in Earth ecology, and played a huge role in the evolution of life on Earth, e.g. in intertidal zones.

Earth is, more than anything else, an entity studied by ecology. Ecology divides it up into ecoregions, for instance. Ecology views it as a single homeorhetic (almost homestatic – but not quite) system. This is the most comple and useful view of the planet. Therefore it is the one we should deal with here, not just the geological perspective.

• The average width of the Earth is approx. 40,000 kilometres (40,030.229 kilometres) divided by pi. This is because originally one metre was defined as one 10,000,000th of the distance from the North pole to the equator, through Paris, France.[10] this is confusing and probably unnecessary. The definition electricity transmission loss of a metre does not really belong in this article, it belongs in the metre article. Secondly, describing the width as two different kilometre values and then dividing by pi is far from simple.

Put simply, the moon and the earth act as brakes on each other (gravity, right?). The effect of the braking is to slow the orbiting of the moon and the spinning of the Earth. The moon already shows only one face to the Earth: that is a result of the braking effect, and is called en:Tidal locking. Yes, tides were higher, atmosphere more turbulent, volcanos belched, and life was quite all right, thank you. Big brother nyc electricity cost enWP has info on en:Tidal acceleration, and a summary on en:Earth.

I agree we should be consistent, but which way? The article uses the definite article about 50 times, and plain Earth a couple of times. I think the general everyday usage is to say the Earth, so I would say that should electricity notes be the preferred usage. Otherwise, some of the sentences will read as ever so slightly alien. English wiki does it without the definite article, but on our wiki we need to be more sensitive to our audience. I think we should wait see whether others have an opinion. If others think you’re right, then go ahead. Macdonald-ross ( talk) 10:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC) Undiscussed changes [ change source ]

An editor has made a huge number of undiscussed changes to this page. They are on the lines of removing all technical terms from the article and replacing them with SE words. In general I object to uncontrolled changing of ‘good’ pages without discussion. Simple English is very weak on science terms (it was invented nearly a century ago). Our science pages must remain true to science, else they gas finder app lose all credibility.

What the editor may not appreciate is that technical terms are part of the real substance of science. They are not add-ons which one can change at will. Anyone studying science at any level must learn the terms used at that level, and cutting them out of our articles makes them useless even for elementary students. We have already agreed between us that technical words should be either linked to a page where they are explained, or explained in a footnote or bracket. The whole point of a wiki is its links. Also, the translation into SE is largely a failure gas delivery. much of the suggested language is not English: it is just a peculiar collection of SE words which do not convey the sense of the original.

I disagree, obviously. The only thing that would make this Wiki lose credibility would be wholesale inclusion of technical English, at which point it simply functions as a POVfork/duplicate of the English Wiki and should be remerged. (See, e.g., longitude of the ascending node, which is not so much a Simple English article as a cut-and-paste stub of a technical English article with the explanatory math stripped out electricity history.) That said, absolutely, the intro pages overstated the extent to which you guys are actually committed to using Basic English, I overdid gas numbers stove temperature it by a long sight, and I’ve already started emending my edits accordingly. The inclusion of people, know, planet, volcano, etc. are both helpful and (apparently) perfectly appropriate. If you see other places where the simplified vocabulary actually interferes with the concept under discussion, go ahead and fix it. (Although personally, I’d still prefer we gloss things that don’t show up in the first few thousand English words at least once and not take them for granted as the old version had it.) — Llywelyn II 16:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC) Cleanup/Additions [ change source ]

This section featured some of the most useless content electricity transformer health risks I have ever seen. It was badly written, unencyclopedic and factually wrong in places. It has obviously suffered death by a thousand edits. How ignorant can you get if you think what we did with domesticated animals was to train them… The language went all round the houses to say things which were in the end quite unclear. I’ve left the last sentence as it was, but I don’t think it is encyclopedic either. What is the evidence for it? Why say it at all? Macdonald-ross ( talk) 18:42, 4 April 2014 (UTC)