Talk:Extrasolar planets in fiction
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Cetians" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Cetians has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 4 § Cetians until a consensus is reached. TompaDompa (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
The redirect Stars and planetary systems in fiction has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6 § Stars and planetary systems in fiction until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
GA Review
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Extrasolar planets in fiction/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 00:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 06:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Your prose style leads to larger, denser paragraphs that occasionally get very clumpy and need to be broken up. A couple of paragraph breaks are the biggest thing you need. As always, amply cited with great SF refs. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Did you know? If you fancy doing so, I always have plenty of GA nominees to review. Just look for the all-uppercase titles in the Television section. Reviews always appreciated.
Copy changes
There are some long paragraphs in some of the sections, and reading may be aided by introducing paragraph breaks.
- I mean, the longest paragraph (in the "In multiple star systems" section) is 440 words. That's a relatively lengthy paragraph, but by no means is it unreadably long. If I thought there were good/natural places to split the longest paragraphs I might do that, but as it stands I would kind of have to rewrite them a fair bit for the end result not to be rather awkward. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Lead
- Most of these fictional planets do not differ significantly from the Earth, and serve only as settings for the narrative. Remove unneeded comma (WP:CINS)
In multiple star systems
- Isaac Asimov's 1941 short story "Nightfall" portrays a planet which is in constant daylight from at least one of its six suns for millennia at a time before a single night of true darkness, which is a much-anticipated event, the 1963 The Twilight Zone episode "On Thursday We Leave for Home" depicts a planet that is challenging for humans to inhabit due to the unending heat and light from a pair of suns, and Mark Hodder's 2012 novel A Red Sun Also Rises is set on a planet where a dim red sun rises at the same time as the planet's twin white suns set. The first list entry has a comma, so the other commas should be semicolons.
- I want a break somewhere here but am not sure where to put it.
- As noted above, I don't think there is really a good place to split the paragraph. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Rogue planets
- Earth is threatened by impact with a rogue planet in the 1933 novel When Worlds Collide by Edwin Balmer and Philip Wylie and its 1951 film adaptation, and becomes a rogue planet itself in Fritz Leiber's 1951 short story "A Pail of Air". Remove comma CinS
- Added "it" after "and" instead. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Physical environment
- Consider splitting this paragraph at
At the other end of the spectrum
- I don't think that's a good idea. That sentence follows directly from the preceding one. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Sourcing and spot checks
Reviewed: 6, 9, 22, 25, 30
No issues.
Images
The three images are all libre-licensed. Alt text is supplied.
Did you know nomination
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by SL93 talk 23:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- ... that the majority of extrasolar planets in fiction are inhabited by native species?
- ALT1: ... that extrasolar planets in fiction come in a variety of shapes, including flattened, cubic, and toroidal? Source: See the sources in the "Exotic shapes" section.
- ALT2: ... that most extrasolar planets in fiction are Earth-like, but this has become less common since real exoplanets have been discovered? Source: See the sources in the "General characteristics" section.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Niftski
- Comment: Plenty of other hooks could be written, if none of these seem ideal.
TompaDompa (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4aa7d/4aa7da6234bcd8938145df8cf093d662fe1b99c6" alt=""