User talk:Urhixidur

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Template:MPCit MPES

Hello. I've come across a template you created, Template:MPCit MPES, while tidying up Category:Astronomical templates. This template now seems to duplicate the functionality of Template:MPCit JPL, which you also created. Is there a reason for these two templates existing seperately now, or could they be merged into one? (I'd recommend Template:Cite MP or something similar.) Thanks. Mike Peel 21:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Read the template description; it used to point to http://scully.cfa.harvard.edu/~cgi/ShowCitation.COM?num=nnnn, but the site has since been changed to refuse this direct link. There is a (now remote) chance that they will eventually re-allow it to work. Meanwhile I've redirected it to MPCit_JPL, which is increasingly complete (it used to be much less complete than MPES). I guess one could replace all MPCit_MPES invocations with MPCit_JPL ones... Urhixidur 23:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor Planet infobox

As you may or may not know the minor planet infobox has been retired and a more general Infobox Planet has been adopted for all planets including minor planets. As a big fan of your AstOrb browser (and I'm sure there are others), it would great if you could update the AstOrb browser to reflect the change in templates. I had been using your browser to create new asteroid/minor planet pages and update older ones, however since the template change, using the browser only creates more work. The discussion of the move is here Template talk:Infobox Planet. Thanks Spot87 21:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to get that done shortly. Urhixidur 18:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, version 1.44 is now available. It uses the new Infobox Planet format and also adds automated footers. Spread the word! Urhixidur 04:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
A couple of minor tweaks later, it's version 1.4.6. Urhixidur 03:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks so much. Spot87 04:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Methane

I think the methane article is less readable now with 'a' replacing 'yr', though more correct I agree. I am not proposing it be changed back however, just would like to know if there is a wiki policy on this sbandrews 23:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Units_of_measurement:
« The Scientific style section of the Manual of Style states "For units of measure, use SI units as the main units in science articles, unless there are compelling historical or pragmatic reasons not to do so." »
« Use standard abbreviations when using symbols. For example, metre is m, kilogram is kg, inch is in (not " or ″), foot is ft (not ' or ′), and pound is lb (not #). »
If you feel readability suffers, maybe add a link to "year" when "a" appears the first time?
Urhixidur 03:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
ok, i put in a wiki link to annum, eg. Mass (Tg/a), I suggest you make a practice of that on any future pages you change in the same way, if only for younger or less science minded readers, or luddites like me :). I'm not sure that 'a' is an SI symbol for year, the sites I found only said that it was an international standard, or an ISO recommendation, kind regards, sbandrews 21:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I've dug it up: NIST SP 811 (1995) says "Although there is no universally accepted symbol for the year, Ref. [6: ISO 31-1] suggests the symbol a." The year as a unit is not mentioned in the SI brochure (unlike the day, for example). The symbol "a" conflicts with the are (unit of area), but context should disambiguate. Urhixidur 12:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comet McNaught

Not sure that the dab links to lots of redlinks at the header of the article is very useful. I suspect that the info would be better at the Robert McNaught article which has already an extensive list of asteroids associated with him. While the comets listed might have been found by McNaught - I can't think they will commonly be called Comet McNaught and are unlikely to be as notable as this current one - if they are then surely their ame will distinguish them to one of the brightest comets for the last 40 years (ie pretty notable). --Golden Wattle talk 04:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, they are less well-known comets, but they share the common quality of all being called "Comet McNaught" (goto http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/CometDes.html and enter "McNaught"). That's what disambiguation is all about. You may want to tone down the dab entry (which is quite large, I'll agree) using a template such as {{otheruses}}. Urhixidur 18:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Had a go - thanks for the suggestion. Regards--Golden Wattle talk 19:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Nomination: Meanings of asteroid names (139001-140000)

An editor has nominated the article Meanings of asteroid names (139001-140000) for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meanings of asteroid names (139001-140000). Add four tildes like this ˜˜˜˜ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article Meanings of asteroid names (139001-140000) during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 13:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diacritics for 8217 Dominikhasek

Hi, I've reverted your page move. While Dominik Hasek's name may be correctly spelled with diacritics, 8217 dominikhasek's isn't. Hasek is a Czech name, so you can make arguments about correct spelling for it, but "8217 dominikhasek" is a purely English name from NASA. It's a minor technicality, but I thought I should point it out to you. --Wafulz 02:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

While the JPL page () does omit the diacritics, that is not conclusive by itself. The IPA pages are more trustworthy (I've exchanged correspondence with the main data keeper there, and he tells me the IPA slavishly follows the diacritics specified in the Circulars): See http://www.ipa.nw.ru/PAGE/DEPFUND/LSBSS/ALF/d.htm. See also http://www.astro.cz/planetky/detail.phtml?number=8217. The only way to tell for sure would be to get the actual MPC 31613, but the Minor Planet Circulars are not available on-line. Urhixidur 02:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{MinorPlanetNameMeaningsDisclaimer}}

I noticed a template you created a long time ago, and I read this line:

Those meanings marked with an asterisk (*) are guesswork, and should be checked against Lutz D. Schmadel's Dictionary of Minor Planet Names to ensure that the identification is correct.

Guesswork is pretty clearly original research, so I don't know if you want to reword it or something. --Wafulz 02:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the original intent was to mark the guesswork as such, but a lot of contributors have been ignoring that guideline. I've been thinking of rewording it along the lines of "meanings that do not quote a reference should be considered tentative". But since the {{MPCit_JPL}} pages have been steadily adding citations to their database, the number of guessswork entries is steadily shrinking...So the problem will eventually just vanish.  :-) Urhixidur 02:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I've reworded the disclaimer following another editor's prompting. What do you think of this new version? Urhixidur 13:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suisun Shrew

Please see WP:BIRD for the rationale behind the capitalization. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, I jumped the gun on that one...Again. :-) Urhixidur 14:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
For my defence, I will state this would not have happened if the article creator(s) had followed the very guideline you quote: « [...] and always create a redirect from the uncapitalised form ». We need for a bot to check for these missing redirects. Urhixidur 14:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asteroid names

I added the comment below to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meanings of asteroid names (139001-140000), but I later decided that, as it is not really relevant there, I'm moving it here instead. I'm sure you have good reasons for doing things the way you do. This is just my perspective as a reader:

Comment (not really relevant to the empty list pages, but I want to put it here for more exposure): Urhixidur has put in an admirable amount of hard work on all these asteroid pages in general, and Wikipedia should be very grateful for that. But I wonder why the meanings of asteroid names aren't included in/merged with the List of asteroids series? As the names often have important references that need to be understood in relation to the identity of the discoverer (being named after national or political heroes, revered teachers, respected colleagues), it would seem that the etymology would be useful in the main list. Consider the case of 1834 Palach:
  • The List of asteroids/1001–2000 mentions that it was discovered and presumably named by (exiled) Czech astronomer Luboš Kohoutek in 1969, but does not give any reason for the name.
  • The Meanings of asteroid names (1501-2000) list explains that it was named after Czech protester Jan Palach (a student who burned himself to death in central Prague in January 1969, in protest against the Soviet invasion that ended the Prague Spring), but does not mention the discoverer.
In this case, there are articles both on Palach the person and Palach the asteroid to explain the background, but in many other cases the historical context of a name would be much clearer if both discoverer and name were in the same list. In the next few years after the Prague Spring, Kohoutek discovered several other asteroids which were also named after Czech national heroes, such as 1841 Masaryk (1971), which does not yet have an article. (BTW, is the politics of asteroid naming covered anywhere?) up◦land 09:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

up◦land 06:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I can answer the above questions, after a fashion. This concerns the "pronunciation of asteroid names" pages as well, as you'll see. I've tried to keep the "List of asteroids" as language-neutral as possible: about the only language-sensitive column is the "Location" one, and I've tried to use the local name as far as possible (since they're redirected to the English entries anyway). Such language-neutrality is, obviosuly, impossible with the "Meanings" explanations. The unstated goal was to make the "List of asteroids" a sort of Wikisource set, or at least something which could be, very nearly, cut and pasted into other-language Wikipedias. Once you understand this perspective, the organisation of the lists (and the heavy use of templates) should make a lot more sense. Urhixidur 14:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Iranian and Afghan provinces

Hey, thanks for moving all those articles to their correct spellings. However, you appear to have been reverted on three of them:

  • (cur) (last) 10:13, 11 October 2006 Skinsmoke (Talk | contribs | block) m (moved Dāykondī Province to Daykundi Province: Name changed to new official version used by Afghanistan's Ministry of Interior)
  • (cur) (last) 16:58, 19 October 2006 Jahangard (Talk | contribs | block) m (moved Tehrān Province to Tehran Province: see discussion)
  • (cur) (last) 00:58, 27 October 2006 Khorshid (Talk | contribs | block) m (moved Khūzestān Province to Khuzestan Province: Move to regular letters because this doesnt work right in some browsers)

Just wanted to let you know, and was wondering if you think the pages should be moved back or not. Khoikhoi 01:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

No skin off my nose; I was just idly integrating some FIPS code updates. The technical reason provided is intriguing; I wonder who actually uses a browser that doesn't do Unicode properly... Urhixidur 16:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: image map at Planet

Nice work... I was thinking of doing that one, but you beat me to it. I'm happy to see this new imagemap extension - it will really help improve clarity for a lot of the science diagrams and images. --Ckatzchatspy 20:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Others to do:
Have fun. :-) Urhixidur 22:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
It may be a good idea to create a wrapper template for those images that are used in lots of places. That way the click-mask is defined just once. Urhixidur 22:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

Re [1] - I closed as speedy keep merely because of procedural issues - go to WP:MFD, since the "template" isn't in Template: namespace. Cheers. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 06:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Not quite completely true; the problem with the template as it currently stands is that it includes itself in Category:Wikipedia related user templates. In that sense, it is no longer private. Urhixidur 20:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pb image sous copyright signalé sur fr:

Bonjour !

Oui, je sais, j'écris en français. Mais je sais que tu le lis ;-).

Je viens de signaler sur ta page de discussion francophone une demande d'une IP postée sur fr:Wikipédia:Requête aux administrateurs à propos d'images sous copyright sur en et sur commons. À toi la balle ici ;-) Merci ! GillesC 20:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geographical names in Iran

I saw that you have moved Isfahan Province to "Eşfahān Province", based on FIPS 10-4. It's better to first discuss this kind of moves in the talk page, or in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Iran. Personally, I think using characters like "ã" may be helpful in showing the correct pronounciation, but using "ş" is rather misleading (because many read it as "sh", but in "Eşfahān" it should be pronounced exactly the same as "s"). Jahangard 17:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not me you should tell this, but the American federal agency that puts out FIPS 10-4. I apologise for acting rashly, but I thought the FIPS spellings would be the most likely to be "correct" (i.e. closest Latin translitteration of the local Arabic). And redirects ensure no lasting harm is done. Since the number of provinces needed to be updated in most cases, I was under the impression the articles were somewhat behind the times. Fix any mistakes of mine, please. Urhixidur 20:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] AfD nomination of List of asteroids/120901–121000

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of asteroids/120901–121000, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of asteroids/120901–121000. Thank you. Nardman1 02:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Bsm

Template:Bsm has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

Also, similarly for {{esm}}. — Kevinkor2 16:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Barry_Nelson_autograph.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Barry_Nelson_autograph.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yonatan talk 21:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asteroid categories

I've been removing Category:Lists of asteroids from articles which are also in Category:Asteroid discoverers for various reasons, including:

  • the latter is a sub-category of the former
  • Marco Cavagna, for example, is not a list, he is a person

I noticed you restored the category to that article, which is why I'm bringing my rationale to your attention. I was thinking of doing something similar to the various observatories which are in the "Lists" category also, but I'm having trouble thinking up a suitable name: Category:Observatories where asteroids have been discovered seems ungainly if accurate. What do you think?

I've also been tidying up the tables where I can, hope you like it. I'm hoping to come up with an extension to the "collapsible tables" method whereby we could have separate sections for "asteroids" and "comets" which could be collapsed individually. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 13:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Marco Cavagna is not a list, but the article includes one.
The category "Asteroid discoverers" initially was not categorised under "Lists of asteroids" (because not all asteroid discoverer articles included a list yet). Since it is now, you are indeed correct in removing the redundant category.
Collapsible tables would be a boon, particularly for those articles with long, tedious lists (whose maintenance in the face of additional discoveries and namings is an as-yet-unresolved headache, by the way).
I'll get back to you about a suggested observatory category name.
Urhixidur 13:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I should have said, I'm making the tables collapsible as I go—having missed some early ones before I had the idea—using the current system (the improved version with separate collapsible sections is vaporware but I've proposed it in an appropriate place so we'll see if anybody who can actually write JS can get there before I blunder in with something they'll have to debug). HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 08:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
For the category, I'm not sure a sub-cat of "Asteroid discoverers" is needed. But if we must, how about "Asteroid discoverers (Observatories)"? Compact, and follows the pattern already established for various disambiguated pages. Urhixidur 11:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
That would make some sense. Are the discoveries attributed to the Observatory and to the person/people? —Phil | Talk 16:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
It varies. The MPC listings sometimes use the location and discoverer interchangeably, and in some cases the discovery attribution made by the MPC to an Observatory is "personalised" on that observatory's web pages. For example, (94411) 2001 TA17 and (94892) 2001 YE5 are both listed as discovered at Ametlla de Mar Observatory, but the former is discovered by Ametlla de Mar whilst the latter is discovered by Jaime Nomen (as far as I can tell, Nomen is the only observer to operate from that observatory, anyway). (90370) 2003 NY5 is listed by the MPC as "Piszkesteto Station at Piszkesteto Station", but the Piszkéstető Station, Konkoly Obszervatórium web site attributes it to Krisztián Sárneczky and Brigitta Sipőcz. Urhixidur 19:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. I've been having several ideas about this situation, ranging from the outrageous to the merely-tedious. My least outrageous idea was that we could do a "Ram-Man-style" mass addition of articles for those asteroids for which we have at least basic information:

  • name(s)
  • discovered by (person/people)
  • discovered on (date)
  • discovered at (venue)
  • named for (where applicable)
  • succession box

Maybe then we could replace all those tedious lists which get people so heated with categories. This would be ideally suited to the "wikidata" thing that's been tossed about for so many years: shame that seems to have been subsumed into the "OmegaWiki" dictionary thing. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 10:09, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

All of the data points you mention, except for "named for", are excerptable from the MPC lists. I maintain privately a series of Excel spreadsheets (broken down by blocks of 15 000 asteroids) of precisely those data (that's how I manage to update the Lists so fast when new batches of asteroids get their numbers). The meanings of names we could for the most part get semi-automatically through {{MPCit_JPL}}, as the JPL web pages are increasingly complete as time goes by (except for the first few hundred asteroids, which got their names before the Minor Planet Circulars were created).
Add this to the astorb.dat data which my AstOrbBrowser already processes, and we could have the basics needed to create 150,000 asteroid stub articles. But do we really want to do this? Most asteroids do not deserve a full page: it may be smarter to create systematic redirects (e.g. the "(150106) 5084 T-3" page would consist simply of "#redirect List of asteroids (150001-151000)#001").
Urhixidur 13:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
As to that, it would be good for the same reason as the Rambot articles: they can then be copied to all other wikis. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 22:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Right…done that lot: observatories next. What would you say to shifting all those lists to a sub-category of their own? —Phil | Talk 22:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Er, Phil, do you mean shift the "List of asteroids (xx1-xx0)" from the category "Lists of asteroids" down to a subcat like "Lists of asteroids (by number)"? (Kinda hard to follow two different threads here...) Urhixidur 03:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's exactly what I meant; maybe something similar for the "Meanings…" lot as well. —Phil | Talk 05:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please explain use of <noinclude></noinclude>

You added the above tags around the Category designated at the bottom of the Template:Pressure Units. I don't understand what that does or when/why it should be used. Would you be so kind as to explain it to me? I will watch here for your response. Regards, - mbeychok 00:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It's very simple and very useful. In a template, <noinclude> means the bracketed contents will apply only to the template page itself, and won't be carried through (included) when the template is invoked elsewhere. <includeonly> does precisely the opposite.
I added that because although {{Pressure Units}} belongs in the Pressure category, the pages that display the template generally do not (e.g. Pascal (unit) belongs in the Units of pressure category, not in the Pressure category).
Urhixidur 18:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. - mbeychok 21:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)