Talk:August 2016 lunar eclipse
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 10 January 2019. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | A fact from August 2016 lunar eclipse appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 February 2019 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Eclipse dropped
editNASA's eclipse webpage (http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEsaros/LEsaros109.html) seems to have dropped this eclipse in its latest revision on May 3, 2009. Does anyone know what has happened? Davidpage (talk) 10:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, it is also removed here [1]. I have printed versions of the original GIF diagram, showing a "grazing penumbral" event. Apparently the updated calculations excluded the event, either due to orbital motion, or definition of the shadow diameter (which is subjective/fuzzy due to the earth's atmosphere.) If I find any statement for the exclusion, I'll link it. There ought to be a summary statement of changes since similar transitional shifts may exist, between total/partial as well.
- I'll move the NASA link here for now, since it fails:
- 2016 Aug 18 chart: Eclipse Predictions by Fred Espenak, NASA/GSFC
- SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 23:33, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Non-eclipse
editAs you can see it is barely an eclipse, it may as well not be an eclipse. I propose to delete the article. 70.82.127.4 (talk) 19:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- The article should be deleted. Fred Espenak wrote in an email to David Cochrane in August 2016: "It all depends on exactly how you define the geometry gof the Earth’s shadow. I talk about it here: http://eclipsewise.com/lunar/LEhelp/LEenlargement.html According to the shadow geometry used by Meeus and myself, there will be NO eclipse on 2016 Aug. 18, It’s a very near miss but no eclipse. Best, Fred". Aloist (talk) 14:36, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
- It was technically an eclipse, because Earth's shadow grazed the Moon, so it should stay. The wording is clear that it was a graze.
Before rushing to delete the page for no other reason than it not being a particularly interesting eclipse, someone (who?) will need to establish a new definition of Lunar Eclipse. At what point does an eclipse become a Wikipedia Acceptable Eclipse? Far better to accept the long-established astronomical definition, leave the article alone and move on. Ggreybeard (talk) 00:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- It seems reasonable and helpful at least to include a statement from Espenak or Meeus that it was a near-miss, if such a statement has public sourcing. Tom Ruen (talk) 05:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
