|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sunset article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
|WikiProject Time||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
File:Sunset 2007-1.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Sunset 2007-1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on April 13, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-04-13. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
|Picture of the day|
Sunset is the daily disappearance of the Sun below the western horizon, and often results in an intense orange and red coloration of the Sun and the surrounding sky. Locations north of the Arctic Circle and south of the Antarctic Circle experience no sunset or sunrise on at least one day of the year.
Use of azimuth
The 1st para says sunset occurs when the azimuth is greater than 180 degrees. Following the link to Azimuth (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azimuth), it seems like an azimuth of 180 degrees is South and an azimuth more than 180 degrees means South through West to North.
Seems more like Sunset is when the Altitude is less than zero instead (again, going by the diagram in the Azimuth page). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikibls (talk • contribs) 09:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- The first paragraph does NOT say "sunset occurs when the azimuth is greater than 180 degrees". It says that when the sun sets, it's azimuth is greater than 180 degrees. In other words, it sets in the west. I don't see any need to change the wording. Spiel496 (talk) 17:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- I wrote that wording. I still think it is accurate. The sun sets on the western half of the horizon. It may be due west, azimuth 270 degrees, or it may be just to the west of south, azimuth 185 degrees, say, or it may be just to the west of north, e.g. azimuth 355 degees. The azimuth is always greater than 180 degrees (and less than 360). Conversely, sunrise happens on the eastern half of the horizon, with azimuth less than 180 degrees. DOwenWilliams (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
All the pictures left in the article look exactly the same. Same yellow-orange same dark hour, same everything. Could be the same picture only different sizes. Sunset doesn't look like this all the time. Hafspajen (talk) 22:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Alvesgaspar, you simply won't let anyone edit this article, right? the only pictures in this article are chosen by...well ... Alvesgaspar!
In spite of a real big amout of editors who would like to add pictures to this article. Like foe example Pocketthis who would like to suggest this photo (File:Mustard Blue Sunset.jpg ) the colors will enhance the boring red page.
SajjadF trying to add a picture, and it is constantly removed  and . And myself, also stating that All the pictures left in the article look exactly the same. Same yellow-orange same dark hour, same everything. Could be the same picture only different sizes. Sunset doesn't look like this all the time. No answer on the comment on the Talk:Sunset, just more pictures removed. By Alvesgaspar.
DOwenWilliams said :Today, I added some text about the fact that, at sunset, the solar disk is distorted by refraction. But no. Alvesgaspar has seen fit to delete the picture, saying it is of "poor quality". DOwenWilliams (talk) 03:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC) and other problems. 
Others may have the same problem, like Pocketthis : Here is an example of some of the colors that show up at Sunset with the right conditions. I'm not suggesting we use these photos or any of my sunset photos, but let's put some color on that page. Pocketthis (talk) 21:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC) Many editors suggested that the article looks sordid and unpleasant with only one kind of orange - black pictures.
I do not agree that the pictures removed are bad or poor quality. Neither do others, like  Pocketthis.
All this points to a non consensus solution using pictures in this article, using only the pictures chosen by Alvesgaspar.
Archive 3 images, not used or removed by Alvesgaspar from article
Archive 3 images, not used or removed by Alvesgaspar from article
removed by Alvesgaspar - 
- Info -- Regular users change, people like to see his own images on the article ... and memory is short. No one to blame really! But please take a look at this long thread, where the problem of what pictures should be depicted in the article was discussed: Talk:Sunset/Archive 2. In there you will find more than a couple of images much better than the ones inserted recently in the article. Maybe the discussion can be refreshed with new and exciting material? Fine with me! But the purpose of article is not to host all types of sunsets, taken in the various parts of the world. For that, we have Commons.-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with Hafspajen. Yes at the end of the day, you cannot put all pictures but don't give a lame excuse like, "poor quality". Some of the photos on the page currently aren't of a high quality either.
And don't say regular "users". It is "editors". The people who have contributed to this article have good experience in editing articles, They are not noobs. Calling them users is inappropriate. Having the same photos always makes no point. Choose some new photos to make the page more interesting. Photos from different places would increase diversity showing that wikipedia is not biased. And, Yes, some photos look similar because generally the colors during sunset are the same !! A discussion should be made again inorder to pick the best photos. SajjadF (talk) 20:00, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- I bumped into this conversation this morning. After I was done laughing about the title of the discussion, I went into the article for the first time in years, and was surprised to see what a mess it was. So I removed the "line-up" from the right side of page and added them to a Gallery setting for diversity. Then I lined up the Mars photo where it belongs next to Planets. Pocketthis (talk) 17:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- As usual Alvesgaspar removed my edits, and in doing so, removed the photos that were put up by others before I moved them to a Gallery. I do feel like some of the photos were more of the Twilight variety, and planned on moving in exchange photos from Commons. However "The world according to Alvesgaspar" should really be addressed here, and rectified. I stopped editing here a couple of years ago because of this man's relentless ego and self appointed guardianship of this article. Good luck Sunrise & Sunset.Pocketthis (talk) 15:00, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Many of us have "pet articles", which we have edited a lot and which we try to keep in good order. I have three or four of them. When I see that someone else has edited one of these articles, I always check to see what they have done. Sometimes, I revert the edit. Sometimes, I make additional corrections or changes. Most often, I leave them alone, accepting that they improve the article, or at least do it no harm. There's no accounting for taste, and if someone thinks some wording should be changed in some trivial way, I'm not going to quarrel with them without good reason. Occasionally, if someone has made a particularly constructive edit, I thank them for it. Constructive editing should be encouraged. But Alvesgaspar has a different attitude. When anyone edits any of "his" articles, he invariably reverts what has been done, without giving any reason except that the edit (usually the addition of an image) is of "poor quality', whatever that means. He does not appear to use any objective criterion. It's just a knee-jerk reaction, which is very discouraging and annoying. I have given up on trying to improve any of "his" articles, which, of course, is just what he wants. DOwenWilliams (talk) 15:45, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
User Pyrometer exclude link to http://sunsetsunrisetime.com on 23:52, 19 January 2014 with comment "Bad site: incorrect calculations"
I compare results of 4 sites:
for Tbilisi, Georgia, lat 41.694110 lon 44.833680, timezone GMT+5, 23.01.2014
All resulsts are little different. It is a computational error. I think it is not correct to exclude one of this sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- "Comets and Shooting Stars Dance Over Paranal". ESO. Retrieved 3 April 2013.