This template is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Astrology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Astrology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This template is supported by the Eclipse WikiProject.
This project provides a central approach to solar and lunareclipse related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article(s), and help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Right now this navbox seems to be an exhaustive list of solar eclipses and is getting rather big. Someone just added all the eclipses in a between 1979 and 2030 making the box gigantic and full of red. I deleted all the redlinks (because they are not helpful for navigation, which is what this box is for, right?) but that's not really the solution.
I think we need to figure out what the point of this box is, right now it's so full of links it's hard to parse. I think there are too many eclipses listed, exhaustive lists are available in the list articles, this navbox ought to have "Notable eclipses", don't you guys think? Likewise, I think there are too many centuries individually listed. Why not have a lists of solar eclipses by century and then have a link for, say 19th, 20th, 21st century eclipses? Cheers, — sligocki (talk) 05:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm the someone who just filled the missing eclipses from 1979-2030. I agree it's not ideal on the long term, but I wanted clarity what eclipses were missing. I'm working on subgrouped solar eclipses in 3-4 year sequences within the saros cycles. For now it was the most convenient place to NAVIGATE what was missing. I'll restore it for now, please! Tom Ruen (talk) 05:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I commented out the wider ranges, pre-2001, and post-2013 where the vast majority of articles were missing. Comment boundaries can be moved, or important ones pulled out, or all pull out during large-scale efforts. Tom Ruen (talk) 06:22, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
This enormity really needs to be split. I'm not against having multiple templates under the same header, but in one template it's just too much. --Anime Addict AA (talk) 19:25, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Since the Template already links to eclipses by century and Saros series, I removed all the links to individual eclipses, the template is a reasonable size now. --TimL (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Wow, I think this removeal is a very bad idea. The template is closed by default, and seemed like a perfectly good way to access individual eclipse articles. Searching by saros series is useless, and the century tables are very large load/format very slowly. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 02:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)