Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Archive 38
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 35 | Archive 36 | Archive 37 | Archive 38 |
Regarding lists of solar eclipses
Hello astronomers! I have already posted this on the Teahouse, but I was told to ask you guys instead. I am working on a list of all of the solar eclipses visible from Canada, and I have a question regarding how the list entries are classified. What exactly determines if only a "sliver" of the subdivision was in the path of the eclipse (and would therefore have a dagger next to its entry)? Is it subjective, or is there a concrete definition? Thanks! ✶Antrotherkus✶✶talk✶ 20:04, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Link to draft for reference. Primefac (talk) 12:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- To answer the question, though... I don't know if that's particularly useful information. Is it really relevant to know whether something passed across the entirety of Nunavut, half of it, or a quarter of it? I wouldn't bother including that information, and would probably make the argument that such information could be removed from any existing articles (though I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise). Primefac (talk) 12:43, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- In my opinion the vast majority of these eclipse articles are not notable, amounting to data, not knowledge. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed, and AFD has supported that opinion for the most part, but that's somewhat of a different discussion. Primefac (talk) 17:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry if you think that my draft isn't that great. I'm mainly just copying from the already-existent list of solar eclipses visible from the United States, meaning that I am using the same key (daggers included) as that article. ✶Antrotherkus✶✶talk✶ 18:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Never said the draft wasn't great, I just don't see the "sliver" information being particularly useful. Primefac (talk) 18:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- In my opinion the vast majority of these eclipse articles are not notable, amounting to data, not knowledge. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Multiple issues with List of largest exoplanets
Hi,
There is an ongoing discussion in the talk page of the List of largest exoplanets, regarding the accuracy of large radii calculated from the luminosities of young planets surrounded by dust, usage of artist's impressions, and miscellaneous notes. The specific discussion can be found in Talk:List of largest exoplanets#Multiple issues. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 21:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging this section, as the above talk page could use some more opinion on the value of artists' illustrations. - Parejkoj (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2024 (UTC)