Talk:List of solar eclipses in antiquity

On 16 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of solar eclipses before AD 500. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Merge proposal

Based on this discussion I think it would be a good idea to merge the content of Historically significant solar eclipses into this page. Not only is it less ambiguous (particularly w.r.t what "historically significant" means) it would put everything on one page. Primefac (talk) 02:23, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Astronomy#Odd_eclipse_page. Modest Genius ^talk 16:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support per arguments Primefac and Modest Genius. Gap9551 (talk) 20:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per the now-archived Odd eclipse page discussion. TJRC (talk) 15:14, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I believe we should have a page listing particularly notable eclipses such as the Solar eclipse of May 29, 1919 which supported Einstein's theory of general relativity. And that certainly wouldn't be considered "in antiquity." -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Gives that the meaning of "historically significant" is incredibly subjective, and given that there aren't many of them (at least on the list), they should probably be merged. RileyBugz ^会話 _投稿記録 20:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Erroneous entries on table

According to JavaScript Solar Eclipse Explorer for Europe ([1]), the solar eclipses of 14 March 190 BCE (−189), 17 July 188 BCE (−187), and 19 October 183 BCE (−182) were all partial from Kiev, Ukraine, not total. Perhaps those entries must be deleted. —Jencie Nasino (talk) 01:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why would they need to be deleted? Sounds like they just need to be adjusted. Primefac (talk) 01:16, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ugarit eclipse redated

In 1989, the Ugarit eclipse was redated to 5 March 1223.[2] Praemonitus (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 February 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sennecaster (Chat) 02:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of solar eclipses in antiquity → List of solar eclipses before AD 500 – Classical antiquity goes back to the 8th century BC, whereas this list goes back to the bronze age. Koopinator (talk) 09:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 13:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Astronomy has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Mildly~~ opposed. This list is not referring to classical antiquity, but just antiquity in general (to quote the article, Any period before the European Middle Ages (5th to 15th centuries) but still within the history of Western civilization...). Primefac (talk) 16:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I see Primefac's point but I don't see any reason not to move this to the more informative title. Not everyone knows what "antiquity" refers to, but giving the specific year is immediately clear. -- asilvering (talk) 18:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: For clearer consensus – robertsky (talk) 13:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, a specific year seems a bit arbitrary, a whole historical era less so. Cambalachero (talk) 14:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What Cambalachero said. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:33, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, antiquity is a common word and more accurate than an arbitrary number. Killarnee (talk) 14:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above 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.