Talk:Earth/Archive 18

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2024

change all mentions of "the moon" to "luna"

change all mentions of "the sun" to "sol"

preferably change all mentions of "earth" to "terra" but that isn't very necessary yet Tygical (talk) 04:46, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this will not be happening per WP:COMMONNAME—on Wikipedia, we use the most recognizable names for a general audience.Remsense诉 04:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Regarding The Tectonic Plates Infobox

The Nazca, Indian, and Filipino plates are very prominently marked on the image displayed, even when they aren't understood as the 7 major plates as per the relevant paragraph. I feel like updating the graphic to one with all unmentioned plates greyed-out as "others" would be a sensible alternative, which would also free up cyan and red to be used in the color-coding. 157.92.14.69 (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

The caption could perhaps be reworded. As to the map, the Philippine Sea Plate is the only one shown where the colour is opaque, which looks odd, perhaps there are more suitable alternatives out there. Mikenorton (talk) 21:32, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Tectonic plates (2022).svg is an alternative, although we would need to look again at the article text, as that map includes the Somali Plate. Mikenorton (talk) 22:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Archean Art

The artist rendition of an Archean landscape is simply wrong. The sky (atmosphere) is believed to have been methane rich and pink/orange, not blue. The Earth-Moon distance back then was probably 40+ Earth radii (currently, it's ~60) so the Moon, if it were visible, would not occupy such a huge fraction of the sky. Its appearance would not be so similar to the modern Moon's surface. In addition, with the near-by volcanic activity, there's even more reason to believe you would not see blue sky. And with more particulates its unlikely that the Moon would be visible at all during daylight. If the artist's impression is supposed to be accurate and representative, I question why it shows a shallow lake or ocean without waves. The complete absence of life should be more apparent. This same artwork appears in a number of other Wikipedia articles, and it is just as wrong/misleading there as it is here.98.17.181.251 (talk) 05:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

"known object to harbor life"

Would, within the first sentence, "known object to create life" or something of that means be more appropriate? Because of the fact we have the ISS and other things of that sort that are inhabited outside of Earth, it might be better. Please try and find something better than create, but the idea is that Earth isn't the only known inhabited thing in the universe. 60.240.247.190 (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Right before what you're mentioning it says "astronomical object". TheFellaVB (talk) 11:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Photographic representation of Earth

More than two years ago, a consensus was reached on Earth's talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Earth&oldid=1070139987#Photographic_representation_of_earth) regarding which version of The Blue Marble should be used to illustrate Earth.

Earth's article is primarily a scientific page, not a cultural one, and therefore should include accurate imagery of Earth rather than romanticized or distorted photographs, even if they are "culturally significant." Take, for example, Neptune. For years, a false color, vividly blue representation was used to illustrate it, and our cultural perception of Neptune was distorted as a result. Now, its current infobox properly uses a newly processed, true-color photograph, and the public perception of Neptune is finally closer to the truth. I believe that, unless a newer true-color image is chosen, the color-calibrated version of the 1972 photograph should be used. Aaron1a12 (talk) 19:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Also pointing out that the (still WIP) MOS:ASTRO explicitly states the infobox image should favor accuracy and clarity above all else when possible. ArkHyena (talk) 19:34, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

It is very debatable whether there is such a thing as "true color" when it comes to photography in general and astronomical photography in particular. If "true color" is the colors which would be seen by the 'average' human *under the same lighting conditions*, that seems reasonable. Almost always photographs are adjusted (doctored) for various contrast, temperature, and chroma parameters. The ideals of accuracy and clarity come into conflict, especially with the Gas and Ice Giants as the various colors are low contrast and of faint hue. So, accurate pictures will show a lot less detail than high contrast ones. Seems to me the ideal is to provide both.98.17.181.251 (talk) 04:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Although I prefer The Blue Marble, here's an alternative full-disk view of Earth taken by NASA's DSCOVR craft in 2018:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_Seen_From_DSCOVR.jpg Aaron1a12 (talk) 01:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

We need to add the new moon

As you may have heard, Earth has a second moon! It’s an asteroid that got close enough to Earth and it is currently orbiting, and it will for another couple of months. Someone needs to change the page to account for the moon. Whole Instance (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

True Gawkgawk30000 (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

These events happen semi-regularly (see Temporary satellite) and are therefore quite trivial and do not belong in this article. ArkHyena (it/its) 13:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree with User:ArkHyena. Temporary moons happen all the times, and 2024PT5 is already mentioned in the article Claimed_moons_of_Earth linked from this article. There is no need to mention small asteroids beyond that which is already mentioned. Dhrm77 (talk) 14:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

OPPOSE Unnecessary. 120.16.78.95 (talk) 07:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

wdym new moon???????? ImNotGettingAUsernameOk101 (talk) 07:48, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

What are you talking about? 120.16.78.95 (talk) 07:53, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

i mean like i didn't know earth has a new moon lol ImNotGettingAUsernameOk101 (talk) 08:25, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

i mean like i didn't know earth has a new 2nd moon lol ImNotGettingAUsernameOk101 (talk) 08:26, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

It is not a second moon, it is just a temporary moon. 120.16.78.95 (talk) 08:39, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

ahhh ok ImNotGettingAUsernameOk101 (talk) 08:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

"Blue and green planet" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Blue and green planet 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 October 21 § Colour redirects to earth until a consensus is reached. Cremastra (u — c) 01:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)