Talk:Wet moon

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 21:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support

The term "Wet moon" has been in longer use for this lunar phase phenomenon than "Cheshire moon", which is a relative - but noted - neologism.--み使い Mitsukai 20:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support sounds right. Gryffindor 18:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Earlier discussions

See Talk:Rising crescent moon. --Eric Forste 23:42, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Vfd

On 12 Jan 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Cheshire moon for a record of the discussion. —Korath (Talk) 00:35, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

Problems with In folklore section

I believe we need someone well-versed in astronomy as well as Hawaiian folklore and astrology to straighten out the In folklore section, which appears to me to be full of contradictions with the rest of the article and with itself.

As I understand it, the moon is said to be "Dry" when the crescent horns appear nearly vertical; i.e., the bowl of the moon is upright and it captures falling rain, preventing much of it from reaching the Earth. According to other sections of the article, this occurs during winter in the northern hemisphere. However, the folklore section says that Hawaiians call the moon the "Dripping wet moon" typically between January 20 - February 18, which is the height of winter. Something seems amiss!

Is this only a matter of my mistaken interpretation? (I.e., "Dripping wet" being in the literal sense of only just beginning to drip, as opposed to my interpretation of "Dripping wet" in the common idiomatic sense of being extremely wet, in other words pouring out rapidly and inundating the Earth below?)

Problems with graphic

My parents, assisted by a professor of astronomy at the local university, designed an overhang over south facing picture windows so that after a certain date in the spring, the windows would be shaded and no direct sunlight would enter. And at the end of the summer, as the sun (and moon) moved into the southern sky, sunlight would shine directly into the house, its heat captured by a stone floor, warming the entire house, most efficiently on December 21. They built this house in 1957--my folks were Stevenson democrats, and very forward looking. The reason I bring up this ancient history is that in the graphic in this article, the moon appears to be at a low angle in the summer and a high angle in the winter. That ain't the way it works, folks. The plane of the ecliptic dips south in the winter, reaching its maximum on December 21. Then it slowly works its way back north, approaching the zenith on June 21. Of course, I am only speaking of the northern hemisphere, but that appears to be what the graphic is intended to show. I swear by my toasty toes on December 21 at the age of three. 152.13.99.132 18:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The graphic is showing the path of the full moon during one night, not the ecliptic plane. The ecliptic plane at sunset/sunrise is steepest/flattest around the equinoxes. The path of the moon (not its orbit!) as it is depicted in the graphic is steepest in winter but the ecliptic plane is steepest around equinox. In the context of this article about the wet moon this graphic is misplaced. There should be a graphic that explains the maximum steepness of the ecliptic around equinox. The path of the moon as it travels across the sky during one night is not relevant for wet moon.--82.83.238.196 (talk) 20:38, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Hemisphere

Should the pattern shown in the graphic be reversed for the southern hemisphere? Logically, one would think so, but I'm no expert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.41.66 (talk) 11:21, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]