Very basic question. Should I get my code reviewed here (I have written some code for a problem in atmos science) or on codereview stack exchange. It is written in Fortran.
Moving forward how should we tackle this ?
I think the rule of thumb will be the answer to the question:
Do you think someone knowledgeable in Fortran but not in atmospheric sciences is more likely to help you than someone knowledgeable in atmospheric science but not in Fortran?
It all depends on the actual or putative issue with the code:
As per my answers and comments on the "related questions" that are linked, I strongly believe that questions on programming are valid here, so long as they are specific to earth sciences.
However, this question does not appear to be about a question related to programming ("How do I do this?" or "Why does X not work in scenario Y?"). It appears to relate to code review ("Here is my working code. Do you see any problems, or opportunities for improvement?"). In other words, it's not questions about concepts that may be illustrated with code, it's simply code.
That's quite a different thing - some might argue that it isn't actually a "question about a problem that the asker is facing" - and personally it's something I'm less inclined to help people with for free (not that that is necessarily a reason that it shouldn't be here!). I assume that's the reason that codereview.SE was created as a separate site from StackOverflow.
I have no strong opinion on whether code review questions that are specific to earth sciences should be allowed on this site (even though I personally probably wouldn't answer them), but I think it's important for people to understand that this question is asking something distinct from "can I ask programming questions here".
I would say you should have it reviewed by both scientists (with coding knowledge, as you'll find here) and experienced programmers, who can offer more technical feedback on your code (such as you'll find on Stackoverflow or CodeReview.SE).
Having previously worked with colleagues on a large atmospheric simulation codebase, this is exactly how code was reviewed in practice: Any changes to the code had to be reviewed both by a 'Scientific' code owner - someone qualified to comment on whether the science as implemented was correct and suitable for the model, and by a 'technical reviewer', who would offer feedback on the style of coding, whether it met technical standards, whether it was efficient etc.
Obviously you don't want to cross-post duplicate questions on stack exchange sites, as it's considered bad practice, so if you go down this route the question needs to be asked from different points of reference on the appropriate site (scientific content vs technical implementation)