Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Solar System task force

Active project?

Is WikiProject Solar System correctly described as Inactive? Lindyjanice1971 (talk) 04:11, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

It is being converted into a task force of WP:AST per the above section. Primefac (talk) 07:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

List of rovers on extraterrestrial bodies listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of rovers on extraterrestrial bodies to be moved to List of mobility spacecrafts on extraterrestrial bodies. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:34, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Organization of "Geology of X" pages

As I was updating Charon's internal structure subsection, it was pointed out to me that the Geology of Charon page also contained outdated information -- in fact, much of it was simply copied and pasted directly from Charon's main article into Charon's geology page. Looking into other worlds' respective geology pages, many of them are also outdated, lacking in crucial information, and vary wildly in how they are organized.

I would advise with updating these articles and coming up with at least a general agreement on how these pages should be organized, given that they cover very broad yet important topics and are linked on many highly-visible pages. ArkHyena (talk) 08:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Problems with Halley's Comet

I am considering to nominate this level-4 vital Featured Article for review. I just corrected a case of blatant vandalism that survived for 14 years (having been introduced only months after the article was promoted to FA status), even though the problem (it broke the page syntax) was raised months ago on the article talk page. I also added two dubious tags for a claim about a historical observation of the comet that was disproven in 1989 (it stands in the article with an old source, from 1985, having long been without any source at all). Your help would be appreciated. I started a discussion at Talk:Halley's Comet#Considering nomination for FAR. I don't know if anyone is watching that article. I haven't looked very hard for problems, but what I found doesn't look great... Renerpho (talk) 07:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Lunar soil#Requested move 27 June 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lunar soil#Requested move 27 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 23:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

External links

• List of minor planets: 2001–3000

There are an innumerable amount of articles that have the same links in the "External links" section. As maintenance I am moving some to the talk pages for any possible discussion. Red flags are any that are search pages, general data base links, or that are inappropriately presented as references. Thanks, -- Otr500 (talk) 19:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Discussion and rationale

Some things just grow by incremental edits and get out of hand. The "External links" section, one of the optional appendices, has grown pass an acceptable number. Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone has their favorite to try to add for a forth.

The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.

• ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
• LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
• ELMIN: Minimize the number of links. --
• ELCITE: Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.
• WP:ELBURDEN: Disputed links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them. -- Otr500 (talk) 20:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Frankly I just don't worry about it because Wikipedia isn't a paper encyclopedia. Praemonitus (talk) 00:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, frankly, thanks for that little bit of confusion. I assume Print Wikipedia was missed. I cannot fathom what the "External links" and not being a "paper encyclopedia" have to do with each other. According to Michael Mandiberg it would cost $500,000 to print the whole thing. -- Otr500 (talk) 23:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)