Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Solar System

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:Featured topics

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dalf (talk | contribs) at 05:35, 14 June 2007 (→Vital improvements). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Working definition

The working definition appears to be, "the Sun's Solar System and its planets, dwarf planets and 'belts' of small bodies". The Moon, the only natural satellite included, is something of an outlier, and is justified presumably by its importance to humans. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pharos (talk • contribs) 02:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Another possible definition could be "major bodies and regions of the Solar System". Most natural satellites would not qualify, but the Moon has so much historical significance that it has honorary "major" status, not to mention the fact that the Moon is huge relative to the size of its planet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arctic.gnome (talk • contribs) 07:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I like the second one because it covers the Moon, which I think belongs in this featured topic. The only big problem I see is that it doesn't include all regions that might be considered major so we'd need to also define "major" in the definition. I think article order could also be included in the definition (see #Article Order). I'd thus probably try to put it as: "The Solar System featured topic consists of the major bodies and significant regions of small bodies in the Solar System, in the order of... The major bodies are determined by..." — Pious7 16:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Order

One significant question is how the articles should be ordered. Should it be in order of distance from the Sun, as it is now? This leaves a dispute about objects that are actually in the region covered (e.g. Ceres is in the asteroid belt). We should decide on and include a clear definition of how the topics are ordered, especially if we are planning on adding new topics anytime soon. — Pious7 16:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vital improvements

This topic does not meet current Wikipedia:Featured topic criteria, and will be eligible for removal after 1 January 2008 if this situation is not rectified. In particular, Uranus must be brought to at least GA status. It may also be desirable that Kuiper belt attain such status, but this is not strictly necessary since it is already ranked "A", which is considered equivalent under the guidelines.--Pharos 02:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kuiper belt has been nominated for GA, to try to clear up any possible problems, and Uranus seems to be undergoing a GA push as well. --PresN 09:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kuiper belt is already A-class which is BETTER than GA so there is no point in nominating it for GA. Dalf | Talk 02:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that there is no formal review process for A-class, nor is there a universal definition of it. The A-class status is arbitrary and unverifiable, GA-status has some weight behind the title and Kuiper belt could stand to have that formal review. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 03:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. A-class is unofficial, GA class is official. Thus, the only things marked should be GA and FA, the earned titles. A-class just means "this is a GA or should-be GA that is almost a FA" and is used by WikiProjects. I reverted the unprecedented check, let's wait until it makes GA to mark it as GA and if it's not, it's not really A-class in the first place... — Pious7 04:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is a colboration by consensus, there is no offical or unofical beyond the core concepts. Additionally if you think the check is unprecedented then I suggest that you have a look at: Wikipedia:Featured_topics/Canadian_election_timelines and Talk:List of Nunavut general elections. If you think A-class should be done away with then I suggest you propose it at the appropate location. Dalf | Talk 05:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Telling the related WikiProjects about the situation this featured topic is in as well as about this discussion might help expedite improving the topic. We might also be able to put something in Portal:Solar System's to do box. — Pious7 16:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Potential improvements

Of course it is desirable that more GAs be promoted to FAs, but see above for the priority work to be done.--Pharos 02:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All planets should be able to be brought up to featured status at the very least. There's only 3 left below FA, I think, so it shouldn't be that hard. — Pious7 16:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible additions

It would probably be desirable to extend this to "classes of solar system bodies" as well (asteroid, comet, etc.).--Pharos 02:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that articles like asteroid and comet are too general for this topic. The topic is about objects in the Solar System, not objects that could be found in any stellar system. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agreee. Anything added should be specific objects or regions. — Pious7 16:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_topics/Solar_System&oldid=138072141"