Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Solar System task force: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 234: Line 234:


[[Special:Contributions/76.66.202.139|76.66.202.139]] ([[User talk:76.66.202.139|talk]]) 05:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
[[Special:Contributions/76.66.202.139|76.66.202.139]] ([[User talk:76.66.202.139|talk]]) 05:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

==OTRS permission for the Space Telescope Science Institute's Digitized Sky Survey website's photos==
See [[WT:AST]], apparently permission is granted for use of these astrophotos from [http://archive.stsci.edu/cgi-bin/dss_form STScI Digitized Sky Survey]
[[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.85|76.66.196.85]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.85|talk]]) 06:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:53, 23 May 2009

WikiProject iconAstronomy: Solar System Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by Solar System task force.

Good Article reassessment for 2 Pallas

As part of the Good Article sweeps conducted by Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force, I have completed a reassessment of 2 Pallas and placed the reassessment on hold for one week to allow some minor things to be fixed. I would appreciate it if editors from this project could visit the reassessment, which can be found here. Please contact me with any concerns or questions. Thank you, GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only remaining issue is finding a citation for Pallas' axial tilt. If anyone knows where to find a source for this, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sortable table of objects in the Solar System

Following a (years old) suggestion in here, I began to draft a sortable table of solar system's objects. I personally think it would be nice and useful, and it could perhaps avoid the current multiple lists of objects with different order criteria. As you can see now it is just a primordial sketch: I present it here so that we can discuss about 1)if it is worthy and if yes 2)what parameters, units of measure etc. would be best to include 3)everything else related. Let me know! --Cyclopia (talk) 18:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also I noticed the following pages that could be interesting to unify in a single, sortable table: List of planetary bodies Table of the largest objects in the Solar System Any idea on if and how to unify them? --Cyclopia (talk) 18:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Those two should be merged. But it will take a long time. I'm still working on a previous merge for Table of the largest objects in the Solar System. The main difference is pictures. If we can put pictures into the largest objects table, there wouldn't be much need for the planetary bodies article. Serendipodous 18:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's why sortable is the key word here, in my opinion. Having a sortable table featuring most Solar System objects would not need to have a separate table for the largest (largest with which cutoff, by the way? by which measure?) -you can just sort by mass, or diameter, and look at them. You automatically have also tables for the most dense, most eccentric, most inclinated etc. objects, automagically. I'd like to know what do you think of the sketch I've linked above. If you think it's worth, I can continue to do it, including at least all planets, dwarf planets and relevant minor planets, and when it begins to be next to readiness put it on WP namespace. However I'd like people to comment it before (using Earth's area/mass/gravity is ok? temperature is best in °C or K?). As for the images, it would be a cool, but subsequent addition, I think. --Cyclopia (talk) 19:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks pretty good, and looks like it would mesh pretty well with the table I'm working on. BTW, the cutoff for the largest satellites/SSSBs in the largest objects table is simply the top ten. What it is in the planetary objects table I have no idea. Serendipodous 20:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll go ahead as to including at least planets now. Can you provide a link on your work-in-progress table, so that I can understand better how is it done and if they can be merged in a single thing on which to work together? --Cyclopia (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All I'm really doing is using the "Planets" section of the Largest objects table as a template for the SSSBs. Still, here's a link (keep in mind; half of it is still planets- I haven't finished overwriting the numbers yet). Serendipodous 20:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks very similar. In my case, I need to have switched axes (don't think sortable works on rows) and I don't like to divide them by category, I'd prefer to keep them all together and having the denomination planet/dwarf planet/minor planet as an additional column (also because it's not necessarily the biggest the most important: I found myself sketching that table because I wanted an answer to the question: what's the known natural object with the farthest aphelion? And the smallest perihelion? Etc.). I'll go ahead with my little table anyway, and in the meantime I hope to gather more opinions. --Cyclopia (talk) 20:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Solar System

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review for Volcanism on Io

Greetings! After a small bit of cleanup, I've requested a peer review of Volcanism on Io. If anyone wants to pitch in, please leave a review, or go ahead and make some improvements. Cheers! Huntster (t@c) 08:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Volcanism on Io, has been submitted to Featured Article Candidacy. Please look over the article, and submit a comment or vote. Thank you, Volcanopele (talk) 05:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{MinorPlanets Navigator}} is up for deletion at WP:TFD 70.51.8.158 (talk) 08:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2006 definition of planet

2006 definition of planet has been nominated for renaming 70.55.203.112 (talk) 04:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Project coordinator

I appointed myself a project coordinator sometime ago. Does anybody have any objections? Ruslik (talk) 13:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I object. You didn't bribe anyone. More specifically, you didn't bribe me. I take checks. ;-) Ling.Nut (talkWP:3IAR) 14:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Asteroid renames

The following two moves have been requested at WP:RM ; See Talk:List_of_asteroids#Requested_move

70.51.10.188 (talk) 04:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mesoplanet

A mesoplanet is an object in our Solar System that is larger than Ceres, but smaller than the planet Mercury. The largest mesoplanets are Triton, Pluto, Eris, and most of the remaining dwarf planets, along with smaller bodies such as Sedna, Quaoar, Orcus, and many other objects. ````Joetough```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joetough (talkcontribs) 21:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's an article Mesoplanet... 70.51.10.188 (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review, Comet Hale-Bopp

Comet Hale-Bopp has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Marskell (talk) 15:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review, Kreutz Sungrazers

Kreutz Sungrazers has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. —Ceran(Sing) 23:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a current event that will be active for the next couple of weeks and, therefore, should be a pretty decently viewed article. Yahoo even had a front page link to the event, so you know it should be a pretty popular article for a little while. Looks like it could use some clean-up and it could probably start with an infobox if there's one for it. Don't have enough knowledge on the subject, but I figure I'd bring it to this WP's attention if it's not in your crosshairs already. Have fun! roguegeek (talk·cont) 04:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If someone can just point me to the infobox that should be used for this article, I could start the cleanup. roguegeek (talk·cont) 17:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is an infobox for it. Serendipodous 19:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I submitted this article for a peer review. You can comment here. Ruslik (talk) 12:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA sweeps: 3 Juno

Hello, as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force, I have conducted a Good Article reassessment of 3 Juno. I have a few concerns that should be addressed if the article is to remain listed as a GA. If anyone is able to help out, the reassessment can be found here. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a featured article candidate now. You can comment here. Ruslik (talk) 16:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA sweeps: 4 Vesta

Hello, as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force, I have conducted a Good Article reassessment of 4 Vesta. I have a few concerns that should be addressed if the article is to remain listed as a GA. If anyone is able to help out, the reassessment can be found here. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 18:44, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick reminder that this article is undergoing a GA reassessment as part of the GA sweeps. It has been on hold for over two weeks, but several concerns remain. If they are not addressed soon, I will have to delist the article. Because it is part of the Main asteroid belt Featured Topic, this would also mean that the Featured Topic would be delisted. There's not much left to do, so any help you can provide would be great. The reassessment page is here. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I destroy?

May I make a redirect page of the article Planetary Database System? The reason is here: Talk:Planetary Database System. Said: Rursus () 16:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3 Juno...

I don't know how topics, let alone Featured Topics, really work, but is there a reason that 3 Juno, a GA, is not included in the FT Main Asteroid Belt? SkarmCA (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review for Vulcanoid asteroid

Hi all, I have done an extensive rewrite of this article and have requested a peer review here. Some input and suggestions would be very welcome because I don't think it's terribly far from GA status, but I've hit the limit of what I can do on my own. Thanks, Reyk YO! 21:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dates and Microformats for lists of Eclipses

Please note my proposal for making a table-row template for lists of solar eclipses, so that they emit hCard microformats. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles in need of attention

Regarding those articles on the project page listed under 'Articles in need of attention', I'm working on their reference repair. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:43, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ceres and the Minor Planet Navigator

A number of articles have a redirect because Ceres is listed as 1 Ceres rather than as Ceres (dwarf planet). As the list and the minor planets navigator runs into potential technical issues, I don't know it it can or should be fixed. I didn't activate it here, but the text to test it in the sandbox is {{MinorPlanets Navigator|1 Ceres||PageName=2 Pallas}}. Novangelis (talk) 22:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Macula (planetary geology)

Macula (planetary geology) has been nominated for deletion at WP:AFD 76.66.196.229 (talk) 07:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I found some sources that should be enough to save the article, but I don't have time to write it at the moment. If anyone else wants to jump in, feel free. Reyk YO! 21:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

main belt asteroids

See WT:AST, someone has mentioned possibly deleting most of the stub articles. 76.66.196.229 (talk) 06:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See WT:ASTRO for additional discussions. 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a featured article candidate now. You can comment here. Ruslik (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Comets

I have a suggestion - that Category:Comets be subcategorized with the creation of Category:Periodic comets ... so that the main category can contain infomation on comets in general, while the subcategory can contain articles on individual comets. 76.66.193.90 (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not object. Ruslik (talk) 13:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone loves this so far, so I don't see why you guys wouldn't love it as well.Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 05:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

FA cleanup needed

According to Wikipedia:Featured articles/Cleanup listing, the article Mars is in need of cleanup. Hopefully, editors will get on it right away, or the article should be submitted to WP:FAR for review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eponyms of Trans-Neptunian objects to Category:Eponyms of trans-Neptunian objects

At WP:CFD a rename has been requested for Category:Eponyms of Trans-Neptunian objects to Category:Eponyms of trans-Neptunian objects

76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Eponyms of Trans-Neptunian objects

Category:Eponyms of Trans-Neptunian objects has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

popularity

FYI, FWIW, here's Wikipedia:WikiProject Solar System/Popular pages 76.66.193.90 (talk) 07:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cat:Transiting planets → cat:Transiting exoplanets

Category:Transiting planetsCategory:Transiting exoplanets has been proposed at WP:CFD, to exclude Mercury and Venus. 76.66.201.179 (talk) 04:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:41, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

comet redirects to nothing applicable up for deletion

C/1978 A1 and Great Comet of 1771 have been nominated for deletion. They are redirects, and their target doesn't say anything about these comets. 76.66.193.69 (talk) 04:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FAR on Comet

I have nominated Comet for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.Cirt (talk) 12:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Solar system basic nominated for deletion at AfD

Solar system basic has been nominated for deletion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solar system basic. Note that the creator of this article has recently created a sandbox article User:HarryAlffa/Solar System synopsis that he categorized into article categories, so I expect the article to be recreated if deleted... 76.66.196.218 (talk) 13:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead section of Solar System

There is an active discussion on rewriting the lead section of Solar System, as Solar System is a featured article, more participants might be a good idea. See Talk:Solar System and Wikipedia:Featured article review/Solar System/archive1 76.66.196.218 (talk) 14:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created this infobox for the articles about planetary magnetospheres (currently used in two articles). Comments and suggestions are appreciated. Ruslik (talk) 12:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this article for peer review. You can leave your comments here. Ruslik (talk) 19:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saturn's outer moons

Hello my name is Chuck Ard(Triton66) and I had some ideas about the origins of Saturn's outermost moons. Clearly the entry of Phoebe into the Saturn system had a destabilizing effect on the outermost moons, much how like Triton's retrograde orbit prevented large moons from forming around Neptune. In Phoebe's case, this happened much farther away from Saturn. As Phoebe entered the outer Saturn system, it may have passed by several small moons and caused their breakups. It's possible that both the prograde and retrograde moons between Kiviuq and Tarvos resulted from the Phoebe entry. Here is my list for Saturn's outermost moons' origins (up to Tarvos that is).

Kiviuq Ijiraq

Phoebe 3,000,000km gap Paaliaq Skathi Albiorix/S2007S2 593,000km gap Bebhiom/Erriapus Skoll 303,000km gap Siarnaq Tarqeq/S2004S13/Greip/Hyrrokkin 388,000km gap Tarvos/Jarnsaxa —Preceding unsigned comment added by Triton66 (talkcontribs) 00:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phoebe (moon) is only 230km in diameter. It is not a captured dwarf planet. It is likely a run-of-the-mill captured centaur (minor planet). Outer moons are not stable in the first place. Saturn already has 7 spherical moons. Triton mostly likely disrupted existing moons by crashing them into one another... -- Kheider (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2009 (UTC)'[reply]

Thank you for responding Kheider, it's nice to meet you. I think what I meant to say was in the really small chance that Phoebe came close enough to a small, Helene-sized original prograde outer moon, it would have to be extremely close for Phoebe's mass to have had any disruptive effect as well. It is possible that none of the moons were effected by Phoebe, I will concede. Anyway, wouldn't you like to know what Tarvos looks like up close! Would it be unreasonable to consider Tarvos to be Saturn's outermost natural satellite, or a captured object? Does having a prograde orbit necessarily mean originating from the Saturn system? It would be so cool if JPL were able to send Cassini to the outer Saturn system at least 1 more time before they do the suicide mission in 2017. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Triton66 (talkcontribs) 02:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

useful tool

Wikipedia:WikiProject Solar System/Article alerts. enjoy! Nergaal (talk) 01:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

133552 Itting-Enke

133552 Itting-Enke has been prodded for deletion. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 04:11, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:I screenimage 30579.jpg

File:I screenimage 30579.jpg has been nominated for deletion, as an ESA copyrighted image being replaceable. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:X3solarflare.gif

File:X3solarflare.gif has been nominated for deletion, as an ESA copyrighted image being replaceable. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Solarflareanimation.gif

File:Solarflareanimation.gif has been nominated for deletion, as an ESA copyrighted image being replaceable. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS permission for Italian website's photos

See WT:AST, apparently permission is granted for use of these astrophotos from Fotographie - Immagini CCD 76.66.202.139 (talk) 04:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Planetary moon categories

A bunch of categories have been proposed to be renamed:

See Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_May_20#Planetary_moons

76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS permission for the Space Telescope Science Institute's Digitized Sky Survey website's photos

See WT:AST, apparently permission is granted for use of these astrophotos from STScI Digitized Sky Survey 76.66.196.85 (talk) 06:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]