Template talk:Solar eclipses: Difference between revisions
m →links at top: fmt Tag: 2017 wikitext editor |
187.105.219.237 (talk) →Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2019: new section |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
Why does the template link [[Solar eclipse|Solar]] [[eclipse]]s? That makes no sense. See [[WP:SEAOFBLUE]]. I am changing. Feel free to revert. [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small><sup>'' [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 13:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC) |
Why does the template link [[Solar eclipse|Solar]] [[eclipse]]s? That makes no sense. See [[WP:SEAOFBLUE]]. I am changing. Feel free to revert. [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small><sup>'' [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 13:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC) |
||
== Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2019 == |
|||
{{Template:Solar eclipses|answered=no}} |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/187.105.219.237|187.105.219.237]] ([[User talk:187.105.219.237|talk]]) 01:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:08, 27 May 2019
Astronomy: Solar System Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
Astronomy Template‑class | |||||||
|
Astrology NA‑class | |||||||
|
Astronomy: Eclipses Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
What's the focus of this navbox?
Right now this navbox seems to be an exhaustive list of solar eclipses and is getting rather big. Someone just added all the eclipses in a between 1979 and 2030 making the box gigantic and full of red. I deleted all the redlinks (because they are not helpful for navigation, which is what this box is for, right?) but that's not really the solution.
I think we need to figure out what the point of this box is, right now it's so full of links it's hard to parse. I think there are too many eclipses listed, exhaustive lists are available in the list articles, this navbox ought to have "Notable eclipses", don't you guys think? Likewise, I think there are too many centuries individually listed. Why not have a lists of solar eclipses by century and then have a link for, say 19th, 20th, 21st century eclipses? Cheers, — sligocki (talk) 05:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm the someone who just filled the missing eclipses from 1979-2030. I agree it's not ideal on the long term, but I wanted clarity what eclipses were missing. I'm working on subgrouped solar eclipses in 3-4 year sequences within the saros cycles. For now it was the most convenient place to NAVIGATE what was missing. I'll restore it for now, please! Tom Ruen (talk) 05:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
- I commented out the wider ranges, pre-2001, and post-2013 where the vast majority of articles were missing. Comment boundaries can be moved, or important ones pulled out, or all pull out during large-scale efforts. Tom Ruen (talk) 06:22, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
UPDATE: I've completed stub articles for events from 1950-2050, and linked here. I added Wikipedia:WikiProject_solar_eclipses to organize this work if anyone else is interested in helping. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 23:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Split
This enormity really needs to be split. I'm not against having multiple templates under the same header, but in one template it's just too much. --Anime Addict AA (talk) 19:25, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Since the Template already links to eclipses by century and Saros series, I removed all the links to individual eclipses, the template is a reasonable size now. --TimL (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, I think this removeal is a very bad idea. The template is closed by default, and seemed like a perfectly good way to access individual eclipse articles. Searching by saros series is useless, and the century tables are very large load/format very slowly. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 02:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
links at top
Why does the template link Solar eclipses? That makes no sense. See WP:SEAOFBLUE. I am changing. Feel free to revert. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 27 May 2019
187.105.219.237 (talk) 01:08, 27 May 2019 (UTC)