Revision as of 16:00, 29 April 2022 editMediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,138,451 edits →User script to detect unreliable sources: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:51, 31 August 2024 edit undoZ1720 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators29,967 edits →Good article reassessment for Archaeoastronomy: new sectionTag: New topic | ||
(15 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{project}} | {{project}} | ||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell| | ||
{{WikiProject Astrology|importance=High}} | |||
}} | |||
{{Archive box|auto=yes}} | {{Archive box|auto=yes}} | ||
{{astrology}} | {{astrology}} | ||
Line 13: | Line 15: | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Ptolemy RM == | |||
== A new newsletter directory is out! == | |||
A new ''']''' has been created to replace the . If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like ), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the ] and someone will add it for you. | |||
:– Sent on behalf of ]. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:DannyS712@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Headbomb/Newsletter&oldid=891933551 --> | |||
== Request for information on WP1.0 web tool == | |||
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the ]! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the ] that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables. | |||
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at where you can leave your response. ] (]) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:JJMC89@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/ListOfProjects&oldid=923068486 --> | |||
== Nostradamus Featured article review == | |||
I have nominated ] for a ]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ]. ] (]) 23:36, 23 January 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Notification == | |||
There is currently an on-going requested move discussion pertaining to ] at ] that might be of interest to this WikiProject. ] (]) 17:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ] has been nominated for a |
||
== Help writing an article for TimePassages == | |||
==Deletion sorting== | |||
FYI, a new deletionsort list for Astrology exists at ] -- ] (]) 15:34, 7 February 2022 (UTC) | |||
Hello, I'm Asia Seltzer, and I'd like to suggest the creation of a Misplaced Pages article for the app TimePassages. I am the app developer, and I understand the importance of neutrality and verifying notability. Based on what I've observed, TimePassages has received significant coverage in Oprah Daily (https://www.oprahdaily.com/entertainment/g36081413/best-astrology-apps/?slide=1), Cosmopolitan (https://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/g29762175/best-horoscope-apps/?slide=3), Bustle (https://www.bustle.com/life/best-astrology-apps), and many other articles. I believe it meets the notability criteria for software/apps on Misplaced Pages. However, I seek the community's insights and consensus on this matter. Could interested editors please review the available sources and consider whether TimePassages warrants a standalone article? Thank you for your time and consideration. ~Asia ] (]) 07:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
== User script to detect unreliable sources == | |||
:You ''can'' ask wikiproject talk pages like this, but the most common and probably the best way to make your new article is to make it yourself then submit it for review. the information on how to go about doing that is here:]. Good luck! ] (]) 05:27, 14 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{Main|User:Headbomb/unreliable}} | |||
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to ] and ]s. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the ]. The idea is that it takes something like | |||
*John Smith "" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14. (<code><nowiki>John Smith "" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.</nowiki></code>) | |||
and turns it into something like | |||
* John Smith "{{highlight||pink}}" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14. | |||
== Help needed in expanding "List of conjunctions (astronomy)" == | |||
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{tl|cite web}}, {{tl|cite journal}} and {{tl|doi}}. | |||
What I'm thinking is that the page "]" is a bit outdated, (the latest listed year being 2020) and that the page only lists a limited amount of years, (2005-2020) and is pretty crowded. So you see, I found this that lists every conjunction from every year from 1950-2024 and is computed from NASA's DE430 planetary ephemeris so it is pretty accurate and reliable. My plan is to use that website to make a couple of pages about the "list of conjunctions", so each "list of conjunctions" page that I will make has 10 years of conjunctions in it. For example, the first page in the series will be "List of conjunctions (astronomy) from 1950-1959" and the second one will be "List of conjunctions (astronomy) from 1960-1969" ''et cetera.'' I know that this should be in the talk page for the article, but ] it's been 6 days since I posted it, and no-one has responded. Since this place has a bigger community, I hope someone will have the time to help me for this cause. ] (]) 05:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
The script is mostly based on ], ] and ] and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed. | |||
:It's been almost 10 days. I'm done with no-one responding to this valiant clause. I will do it myself. It's going to be nigh impossible, but at least '''<big>I</big>''' have the determination and guts to even attempt it. If you disagree with anything I'll do or have done, the only person to blame is yourself. If, '''<big>If</big>''', on the other hand, you would like to help, message me on my ]. If you do, I salute you. We can do this together. ] (]) 21:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
Do note that this is '''not a script to be mindlessly used''', and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at ]. Questions, comments and requests can be made at ]. | |||
:: {{ping|Iamamodforjellymario}} My one suggestion would be to include a rigorous definition of the maximum ] for inclusion in the list. The largest I could find listed is 11°08', which is 22 times the diameter of the Sun and Moon. My impulse would be to tighten that up considerably, but I have no idea what criteria would serve. ] (]) 13:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::@]: yeah, that would be a good thing to consider. when I checked the website, there was over 100 conjunctions for each year. I still am thinking about doing it, but I agree that tightening the criteria is very important in making this possible to do. the conjunctions in the ]) page are pretty random and disorganized. ] (]) 21:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::: {{ping|Iamamodforjellymario}} According to ], "A Conjunction (abbreviated as "Con") is an angle of approximately (~) 0–10°. Typically, an orb of ~10° is considered to be a Conjunction." So that might work. Alternatively, a good field of view with astronomical binoculars is around 6°. ] (]) 00:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Requested move at ] == | |||
-  <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] · ] · ] · ]}</span> | |||
] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 12:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
<span style="font-size:90%">This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from.</span> Delivered by: ] (]) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 15:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
<!-- Message sent by User:Terasail@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Headbomb/sandbox3&oldid=1085285969 --> |
Latest revision as of 15:51, 31 August 2024
This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Astrology |
---|
Background |
Traditions |
Branches |
Astrological signs |
Symbols |
Ptolemy RM
There is currently an on-going requested move discussion pertaining to Ptolemy at Talk:Ptolemy#Requested move 25 May 2023 that might be of interest to this WikiProject. Walrasiad (talk) 17:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Help writing an article for TimePassages
Hello, I'm Asia Seltzer, and I'd like to suggest the creation of a Misplaced Pages article for the app TimePassages. I am the app developer, and I understand the importance of neutrality and verifying notability. Based on what I've observed, TimePassages has received significant coverage in Oprah Daily (https://www.oprahdaily.com/entertainment/g36081413/best-astrology-apps/?slide=1), Cosmopolitan (https://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/g29762175/best-horoscope-apps/?slide=3), Bustle (https://www.bustle.com/life/best-astrology-apps), and many other articles. I believe it meets the notability criteria for software/apps on Misplaced Pages. However, I seek the community's insights and consensus on this matter. Could interested editors please review the available sources and consider whether TimePassages warrants a standalone article? Thank you for your time and consideration. ~Asia 0Rl0N (talk) 07:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- You can ask wikiproject talk pages like this, but the most common and probably the best way to make your new article is to make it yourself then submit it for review. the information on how to go about doing that is here:Help:Your first article. Good luck! Iamamodforjellymario (talk) 05:27, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Help needed in expanding "List of conjunctions (astronomy)"
What I'm thinking is that the page "List of conjunctions (astronomy)" is a bit outdated, (the latest listed year being 2020) and that the page only lists a limited amount of years, (2005-2020) and is pretty crowded. So you see, I found this website that lists every conjunction from every year from 1950-2024 and is computed from NASA's DE430 planetary ephemeris so it is pretty accurate and reliable. My plan is to use that website to make a couple of pages about the "list of conjunctions", so each "list of conjunctions" page that I will make has 10 years of conjunctions in it. For example, the first page in the series will be "List of conjunctions (astronomy) from 1950-1959" and the second one will be "List of conjunctions (astronomy) from 1960-1969" et cetera. I know that this should be in the talk page for the article, but I've already done that, it's been 6 days since I posted it, and no-one has responded. Since this place has a bigger community, I hope someone will have the time to help me for this cause. Iamamodforjellymario (talk) 05:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's been almost 10 days. I'm done with no-one responding to this valiant clause. I will do it myself. It's going to be nigh impossible, but at least I have the determination and guts to even attempt it. If you disagree with anything I'll do or have done, the only person to blame is yourself. If, If, on the other hand, you would like to help, message me on my talk page. If you do, I salute you. We can do this together. Iamamodforjellymario (talk) 21:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Iamamodforjellymario: My one suggestion would be to include a rigorous definition of the maximum angular separation for inclusion in the list. The largest I could find listed is 11°08', which is 22 times the diameter of the Sun and Moon. My impulse would be to tighten that up considerably, but I have no idea what criteria would serve. Praemonitus (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Praemonitus: yeah, that would be a good thing to consider. when I checked the website, there was over 100 conjunctions for each year. I still am thinking about doing it, but I agree that tightening the criteria is very important in making this possible to do. the conjunctions in the List of conjunctions (astronomy) page are pretty random and disorganized. Iamamodforjellymario (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Iamamodforjellymario: According to Astrological aspect#Conjunction, "A Conjunction (abbreviated as "Con") is an angle of approximately (~) 0–10°. Typically, an orb of ~10° is considered to be a Conjunction." So that might work. Alternatively, a good field of view with astronomical binoculars is around 6°. Praemonitus (talk) 00:53, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Praemonitus: yeah, that would be a good thing to consider. when I checked the website, there was over 100 conjunctions for each year. I still am thinking about doing it, but I agree that tightening the criteria is very important in making this possible to do. the conjunctions in the List of conjunctions (astronomy) page are pretty random and disorganized. Iamamodforjellymario (talk) 21:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Iamamodforjellymario: My one suggestion would be to include a rigorous definition of the maximum angular separation for inclusion in the list. The largest I could find listed is 11°08', which is 22 times the diameter of the Sun and Moon. My impulse would be to tighten that up considerably, but I have no idea what criteria would serve. Praemonitus (talk) 13:27, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Ancient near eastern cosmology#Requested move 23 August 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ancient near eastern cosmology#Requested move 23 August 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Remsense ‥ 论 12:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Archaeoastronomy
Archaeoastronomy has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:51, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Categories: