Template talk:Draco (constellation)
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Move discussion in progress
editThere is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Stars of Andromeda which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:04, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Redlinks and notable objects
editThis template used to include all stars (and later other objects) that were most likely notable (per WP:NASTRO). This meant that there were a large number of redlinks, more than actual wikilinks, and a very large number when NGC objects were added to the template. The redlinks were removed - not my choice, but certainly there is an argument for it. I reversed the removal and instead commented out the entries currently without articles, to maintain a list of notable objects without cluttering the template. There doesn't seem to be any point including one redlinked star and leaving the rest out, as was done in a recent edit. No doubt 4 Dra is notable, and no doubt it should be added if and when there is an article, just not on its own as a redlink. Lithopsian (talk) 13:00, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Lithopsian OK. In SvWp I have recently included all the Flamsteed objects, as I am writing articles in the constellation of Draco. I see the red links as inspiration for writing the missing articles, but I have no problem if EnWp has other ways around. I'm aware that EnWp has had star templates cluttered with red links in a way SvWp never has. Deryni (talk) 13:06, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that a list of obviously notable stars was a handy thing to have. I can also see that a very big box that is 75% red, which is what some of the templates became after non-stellar objects were added, is somewhat unhelpful. I wanted to at least keep the list of notable stars around even if not visible, perhaps as "inspiration". Lithopsian (talk) 14:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Lithopsian I certainly agree to that. However, now the Swedish template is complete with Flamsteed objects after a few days hard work. All the best! Deryni (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- The EnWp template problem is obvious in Template:Taurus (constellation). This constellation is my next work in SvWp which made me look. Deryni (talk) 15:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Lithopsian I certainly agree to that. However, now the Swedish template is complete with Flamsteed objects after a few days hard work. All the best! Deryni (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that a list of obviously notable stars was a handy thing to have. I can also see that a very big box that is 75% red, which is what some of the templates became after non-stellar objects were added, is somewhat unhelpful. I wanted to at least keep the list of notable stars around even if not visible, perhaps as "inspiration". Lithopsian (talk) 14:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)