![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
Viking Wind Farm
The result of the move request was: page moved' as a technical request. I propose that you create the other "viking wind farm" article with any appropriate disambiguation phrase first, before deciding which (if either) is primary for the topic. In the absence of any Wikipedia ambiguity, we forego Wikipedia disambiguation. -- JHunterJ ( talk) 21:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Viking Wind Farm (Shetland Islands) → Viking Wind Farm – The article was moved from its current title to Viking Wind Farm. However, it was moved back by other editor with edit summary "Another wind farm with same name exists http://www.thewindpower.net/windfarm_en_3042_viking.php - clarify which one as per WP:TITLE Since no two art...". This is true that another project exists; however, there is no article with this name. Therefore, there is no need to include Shetland Islands in the title, and per WP:TITLE the common name should be used. Beagel ( talk) 19:18, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
Just to answer questions:
1) The source provides hub height (90m) and turbine total height (145m). That means that the rotor diameter is 2*(145-90)=110m 2) 370 or 371 depends how you rounding it. The exact figure for 103 turbines is 103*3.6 = 370.8. Most of media sources have rounded it to 370, but more precise is 371 as used e.g. by ReCharge. If you prefer to have 370.8MW, I have nothing against it
I don't understand why this the information about turbines was removed from the infobox. Reducing the number of turbines does not change the turbines specification; it may change only cost, area or construction time. Therefore I will restore the information in the infobox. Beagel ( talk) 13:29, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
quote (removed):
The link is dead and doesn't show up on archive.org. I couldn't find another reference to the contract - which is very odd.. Could this have been a mistake on the website ?
Please fix if correct (with a working reference) Thanks.. Xiiophen ( talk) 16:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
No mention on the official website - almost certainly wrong - by the time the wind farm is developed (if) the Siemens 3.6MW may not even be available.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Viking Wind Farm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)