Talk:Coal
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Coal Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Template:Split article Template:Split article
Template:Split article Template:Article history Template:WikiProject banner shell Template:Broken anchors
- REDIRECT Template:Archives
Template:Rcat shell User:MiszaBot/config
needs update but I don't have time
https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-2019#executive-summary
Split proposal
Template:Discussion top This topic is vast and important. The article is too long. I will remove "Transition away from coal" since we have a article focused on that aspect: coal phase-out
Main recommendation: 1) An article about coal, period. What is it? Where did it come from? Many classifications (rank, grade). What is it used for? 2) The rest: mining (and economics), environmental impacts --Smokefoot (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Can you be more specific? There are already articles on coal mining and the health and environmental impact of the coal industry. Also I suggest excerpts, for example of coal phase-out. Chidgk1 (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- That would make sense. This should be general and more separate more. FairfieldAve (talk) 01:17, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the recommendations. Topics related to coal covered by other articles should only be mentioned briefly with a link Ita140188 (talk) 10:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree the topic is vast and important. There is potential to reduce duplication within the article and move/remove less-important details that can be covered in sub-articles. I can spend some time on this this week. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 19:50, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Since the "Transition away from coal" section has been removed [1] as proposed, is it OK to remove the "It has been suggested that this article should be split into multiple articles." tag at the top of the article? I think everyone agrees on moving towards WP:Summary style so it might be time to move more towards execution rather than further discussion. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 21:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Smokefoot Can we close this now as it is still showing up on our list of alerts at Wikipedia:WikiProject Climate change? Chidgk1 (talk) 19:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- I lost track. Split proposal has been removed.--Smokefoot (talk) 19:09, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Coal power plants, pollution, and abatement/mitigation
As a heads-up, I'm planning to see if I can improve the sections on air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. In recent years there has been a lot of discussion about whether to phase out coal or "unabated coal". There is also a lot of discussion out there about "clean coal". The Coal article should help the reader understand the debates. I plan to bring in some relevant content from Carbon capture and storage and this Factcheck source. I'll try to do this without lengthening the article. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 22:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Clayoquot Great - I think you have improved it enough to nominate it as a good article if you want. I have a couple of other articles in the nomination queue as I almost always find the reviewers make really useful comments which help me improve articles Chidgk1 (talk) 19:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding a nomination for Good article status, were you referring to the Carbon capture and storage article? The Coal article still needs quite a bit of work. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 19:38, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Underground fires
I've removed the following passages from the "Underground fires" section as I think they're unnecessary detail for an overview article.The examples that have sources are already in Coal seam fire. As for the unsourced example from Tajikstan, I tried to find sourcing and couldn't.
In Centralia, Pennsylvania (a borough located in the Coal Region of the U.S.), an exposed vein of anthracite ignited in 1962 due to a trash fire in the borough landfill, located in an abandoned anthracite strip mine pit. Attempts to extinguish the fire were unsuccessful, and it continues to burn underground to this day. The Australian Burning Mountain was originally believed to be a volcano, but the smoke and ash come from a coal fire that has been burning for some 6,000 years.[1]
At Kuh i Malik in Yagnob Valley, Tajikistan, coal deposits have been burning for thousands of years, creating vast underground labyrinths full of unique minerals, some of them very beautiful.
The reddish siltstone rock that caps many ridges and buttes in the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and in western North Dakota is called porcelanite, which resembles the coal burning waste "clinker" or volcanic "scoria".[2] Clinker is rock that has been fused by the natural burning of coal. In the Powder River Basin approximately 27 to 54 billion tons of coal burned within the past three million years.[3] Wild coal fires in the area were reported by the Lewis and Clark Expedition as well as explorers and settlers in the area.[4]
Template:Reflist-section Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 20:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2024
Template:Edit semi-protected I would like a citation added for this section "It is also customary and considered lucky in Scotland and the North of England to give coal as a gift on New Year's Day. This occurs as part of first-footing and represents warmth for the year to come."
I see no proof of this online. Magus2758 (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- File:Yes check.svg Done Citation found and added. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 14:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
President Trump's reclassification
Do we add anything in here about Mr. Trump's reclassification of coal as a mineral? Coppenheimer (talk) 20:42, 11 April 2025 (UTC)