Talk:Regional effects of climate change

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Effects of climate change
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Effects of climate change

Skip to table of contents

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Effects of climate change#Variations between regions]] The anchor (#Variations between regions) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

The section "regional impacts" is problematic

I have a problem with the section "regional impacts".

Firstly, it's the same title as the article's title which is somehow odd.
Secondly, it leads to repetition because e.g. Africa is mentioned there and then again later in the "most vulnerable" section.
Thirdly, the section is just a collection of bullet point lists (where it's unclear if all bullet points for one region come from the same reference, or if the sources of the bullet points are different). It will be hard to keep those bullet points up to date, and we are linking to the relevant sub-articles. Should we maybe just use excerpts from those regional sub-articles? Although we only have the following sub-articles for regions so far: Europe, Africa, South Asia, Caribbean, MENA. We have a lot of country articles by now though (52). Maybe we rather just point people there?

I like the sections that come later in this article, it's just the section called "regional impacts" which I find problematic. EMsmile (talk) 08:38, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to improve the situation by renaming the section to "By region" and moving it towards the end of the article, therefore giving it less significance. It's still not great. Wondering if those bullet point lists are adding that much value or if they just repeat what is said elsewhere in the article. EMsmile (talk) 03:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]