Talk:Lunar eclipse/Archive 1

Archive 1

Lunar Eclipse Diagram

The latest lunar eclpise happened at 9:43 February 20th 2008 seen in Canada. I removed "[[Image:Lunar eclipse diagram-en.svg|280px|thumb|" from the article, as it shows the sun somehow revolving around the earth. As far as i know, this is incorrect. PCRRN (talk) 01:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion, but it isn't incorrect from an observational point of view. From the perspective of a viewer on earth, the sun's direction relative to the fixed stars travels around the ecliptic in one year, and the direction of the moon travels around the ecliptic in one month. I restored the image. Tom Ruen (talk) 01:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you make that clear on the image then? PCRRN (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't change the image myself, but I changed the caption. I'm not sure what I'd change on the diagram itself - it shows the earth in the center. I guess it would help to show the 12 zodiac names around in a circle, to help imply its a fixed-star reference frame. Tom Ruen (talk) 23:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for changing it. PCRRN (talk) 16:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

There is also something wrong in the caption, something inconsistent. Is the perceived circle a year in duration? A month? Both? The caption text says "As seen by an observer on earth, the Moon crosses the ecliptic every orbit at positions called nodes twice every month. When the full moon occurs in the same position at the node, a lunar eclipse can occur. These two nodes allow two eclipses per year, separated by approximately six months." Well, if the moon crosses the ecliptic twice a month, then where does the "allow two eclipses per year" part come in?? Ronewolf (talk) 18:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh perhaps it gets hard to explain clearly. An eclipse can only occur at two points in the moon's orbit, called the nodes, where it crosses the path of the sun. A lunar eclipse occurs when the sun is opposite the moon when its crossing the nodes. Currently this can happen in February and August. Tom Ruen (talk) 18:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Earthlight

The text under the first photograph claims that at a full lunar eclipse the moon is lit only by "Earthlight." Surely, as it says in the rest of the article, the moon is actually lit by the refracted sunlight curving around the Earth? On that note, would it be good to point out that the reason the moon's color is most commonly reddish is because of this refraction, making it similar to a red sunset? Asbestos 29 Oct 2004.

4 May 2004 eclipse

Does anyone know what time the eclipse on the 4th of May is due to happen in the various locations across the region it will affect? A URL would be sufficient; I'll tabulate and add the information here, copyright permitting. Mr. Jones 08:48, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

[1]

Lunar Eclipse of Piye

Pharaoh Piye from 752-721 BC, a Kushite pharaoh, travelled North to the Nile Delta, for a year, then returned South to Kush and inscribed his "Piankhi Stela" (an autobiography). The famous, 1906, Breasted five-volume work, Ancient Records of Egypt,1907, has the translation, and it takes up some 40 pages. This autobiography on a stela mentions a night-time lunar eclipse (and the implications to his military/pharaonic activities). Maybe someone could research it, and find out what time of which year (season) the eclipse may have occurred? Michael McAnnis, be 732 BC. Thus, the eclipse occurred prior to 732. Breasted's translation is still probably the best source of information, that I know of? Any takers for figuring out the time of the eclipse?...good luck, and enjoy...MichaelMcAnnis,ArizonaUSA....Mmcannis 03:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Difference between New Moon and Total Lunar Eclipse?

Isn't the monthly new moon a lunar eclipse (i.e. the moon passing into the earth's shadow)? What is the difference with the harvest moon, which turns a reddy-brown colour?

The monthly new moon is when the moon's shadow faces us, ie, the sunlit bit is facing away from us. This is why Solar Eclipses occur at new moons - the moon is between the Earth and the Sun - and why lunar eclipses happen at full moons - the Earth is between the Moon and the Sun. The moon's orbit is inclined to the Earth's by about five degrees, and is slightly eliptical, as is the Earth's orbit about the Sun, which is why not every new moon is accompanied by an eclipse, and similarly for full moons. Normal harvest moons are just very bright full moons close to the autumnal equinox, more notable for their size than their colour. They tend to be very bright yellow, but if eclipsed, then it can go reddy-brown. MilleauRekiir 18:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Nope, not even size or color but the uninteruptability of light to work by. Harvest moons are the ones that rise at dusk almost the same time each night for several nights so the harvesting doesn't have to stop. Sagittarian Milky Way 07:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Difference between New Moon and Total Lunar Eclipse?

No, the new moon is not a total lunar eclipse as it is not in the earth's shadow. The new moon is unilluminated because the side of it has turned away from sunlight(due to the moon's rotation),hence the phrase,The dark side of the moon.

"The Lunar Eclipes is not a shadow. Its one of the most things you may ever see. If you really take the time and look at the sun or the moon.....it has more than 1 features then youll ever think. Shadows dose not have nothing to do with the Lunar Eclipes. Make sure that you know what you are talking about......therefore...I am good at that stuff. Its called Paying Attintion in school And studying about stuff. thanks for you time....." Mallory S. May 14, 2006 11:48pm

Total lunar eclipses set to end?

I remember reading a long time ago that total lunar eclipses would not occur after a certain point in time due to the moon gradually moving further away from the earth? Brianjd

I think you are probably referring to total solar eclipses not happening after a certain period of time (again, due to the moon moving father from the earth as a result of the tides on earth and the conservation of angular momentum) - but there's about 600 million years before tidal acceleration finally results in the last total solar eclipse. It may not happen for lunar eclipses - it depends on what the final earth-moon distance is when it gets to a tidally locked orbit, and whether the sun has destroyed the earth-moon system beforehand... Coatesg 16:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

European eclipse list

This list is only half translated from German, only applicable to Europe. and rather unsightly. I will remove it, if nobody gives a good reason to keep it, eg. by improving it drastically. Awolf002 30 June 2005 22:13 (UTC)

Vandalism

Beware of vandalism reading, "The moon is made of cheese!" I have removed this.

No need to comment on reverting vandalism. This page gets lots of silly edits, and anyone can fix it by reverting to a previous version. Thanks! Tom Ruen 07:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Top diagram

The moon looks weird like that. It should be more or less circular. Does anyone know how to fix it?--Shantavira 13:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement before nominating as a Good article

I have a few comments that might be useful for improving this article.

• I don't think that the first image should be in the introducing paragraph. Also the first image is not as good as the ones found on the solar eclipse page. For instance, the umbra and penumbra should be labeled, and the straight lines for "sun light" is somewhat of a misrepresentation.
• The second figure needs information in the caption. When I first looked at this, I thought "are you sure this is a lunar eclipse, and not just a phase of the Moon?"
• It is not clear if the paragraph starting with "Because the Moon's orbit around the Earth is inclined 5° with respect to..." should be in the section "Types of lunar eclipses". I would probably place all the material that follows this in a section that describes the orbit of the Moon and its relationship to eclipses.
• "If you were on the Moon's surface during a lunar eclipse you would witness a solar eclipse, " I presume that it would be a "total" solar eclipse, as opposed to annular. You could also mention that the temperature at the lunar surface was measured during lunar eclipses as part of the ALSEP heat flow experiment.
• Perhaps a short table noting when future lunar eclipses will occur should be added here.
• Concerning the section "Longest total lunar eclipse between 1900 and 2000", it should be noted that there is a maximum duration that a lunar eclipse can be that is a function of its orbit geometry.
• History "Indian mathematician Aryabhata gave accurate calculations for both the solar eclipse and lunar eclipse." They gave calculation of what? predictions of when they will occurr? length?
• Is this really necessary? "The total eclipse on October 27, 2004 occurred during game 4 of MLB's World Series" I presume that there are much more interesting historical eclipses.

-- Lunokhod 14:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Duration of Eclipse at Apogee

The text explaining why a lunar eclipse can be longer at apogee could use clarification on the following point: "Specifically, a totally-eclipsed Moon being concomitantly at or near apogee will lengthen the duration of totality for two reasons: first, the Moon will appear to move more slowly across the umbra, and second, the Moon will appear smaller as seen from Earth and therefore remain inside the umbra longer." -- A curious reader (me) will wonder whether or not this is actually the case, given that while the moon appears smaller, the umbral cone is also smaller at apogee. Does one of these differences dominate the other, and why? Either an explanation or a citation would be beneficial. 136.159.119.31 19:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The umbral cone has a top angle equal to the parallax of the Sun: only 8.8". So iys diameter differs only very little at the location of the apogee and the perigee. I'll add this to the text. Tom Peters 10:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Is "Longest total lunar eclipses between 1900 and 2100" necessary?

Does anyone else find that the section "Longest total lunar eclipses between 1900 and 2100" is not terribly useful? The durations only differ by about 7 minutes, and given that the eclipses are almost 2 hours in duration, an observer without a clock is not going to notice this. Perhap we can summarize this section in one or two sentences by just saying that eclipse durations can last up to X minutes. In fact, there is probably a maximum upper limit that can be stated. Lunokhod 19:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed WizardFusion 10:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow

The sun is directly at earth during a lunar eclipse! it must be VERY hot in those places! the moon looks cool when its orange! wow!

Vandalism

I am sorry, but I cannot stop whoever is vandalizing this page. This is a public IP address, and hundreds have access to this page every day. 169.204.137.5 21:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Got TWO

Got one in March 3, 2007, and another one in August, 2007. Go to www.almanac.com/Eclipses for more.205.240.146.224 08:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

These will, for some areas, will be selenelion/selenehelion in some areas of the US. See above website for more info. 205.240.146.224 08:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Lunar eclipse

A lunar eclipse is where the sun, moon & earth line up and the lunar surface dissapers totally this is called an allignment which happens every 5,000 years we are lucky to experiance this tonight —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Enchantian2 (talk • contribs) 10:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC).

A baby is where the mummy & daddy line up and the clothes dissapers totally this is called an session which happens every 5,000 minutes we are lucky to experiance this at all with our level of intelligence —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.210.176.24 (talk) 23:19, 3 March 2007 (UTC).

March, 2007 lunar eclipse

I think the photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LunarEclipse0303072244.jpg should be at the top. --jazzle 00:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I really think it should be at the top too. But images have been removed unless there are some of you who agrees with Jazzle. -- Dat789Dat789 12:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually in Northern England its fully visible. OsirisV 22:03 3/3/07

From New England. The moon is not yet visible. Current time 6:27PM. In the 'description' section, it says lunar eclipses occur every two years, and further down it says they occur at least twice a year.

Please can we not have 15 pages of identical (bad) photos of the 3 March eclipse... makes the article very untidy :( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.26.181.238 (talk) 01:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

How do you get rid off all that white space near the top of the page? -- 88.104.122.144 12:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't thing that this was the first ever total lunar eclipse - could be made clearer Martinmarv (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Better photos for the 3 March eclypse

I second the previous comment, the quality of the current photos is very poor. There are plenty of CC-licensed photos of excellent quality available at high resolution on Flickr. You may also want to take a look at the following groups:

• http://flickr.com/groups/lunareclipse0307/
• http://flickr.com/groups/loony/
• http://flickr.com/groups/moonshots/
• http://flickr.com/groups/25191652@N00/
• http://flickr.com/groups/eclipse/

-- DarTar 10:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

We also need to get rid of some of the pictures currently in the article. There are so many at the moment that the article has become a mess. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 09:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

rWd, see also my comment here -- DarTar 10:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed some of the March 3/4 images. The article still needs some more work, because it's still too cluttered and messy, imo. This includes the 'Description' section, which looks bad now with images both on the left and right side of the text. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 09:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Some of the removed images should be preserved under the heading "Recent Images of the eclipse" or something akin to that. -Dat789 12:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. This is an encyclopedia, not an image gallery. The article now has three pictures of actual lunar eclipses and that should suffice. If people want more, they can go to Flickr. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 14:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an image gallery per se but it does not breach Wikipedia's policies to have a few more images on the article. However, you're right, people can go to places like Flickr or the like for more images. Perhaps because there are only a limited variations of the moon's image.-Dat789

Two conditions??

Surely there is only one condition for a lunar eclipse to occur. Sun, Earth and Moon in alignment. The Moon is bound to be full under such an alignment and therefore cannot be a condition for an eclipse to occur. It would be OK to say that a lunar eclipse can only occur during a full moon, but it cannot be a condition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.195.173.199 (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Be careful about saying all you need is alignment - they can be all lined up nicely at new moon too, though that will never lead to a lunar eclipse - but you might get a solar eclipse instead. So I'd say full moon was the better condition, as it's more specific than "alignment". Since full moon doesn't always lead to an eclipse, that's where the second condition comes in. It could probably be phrased better in the article though. Spiral Wave 18:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Like this? "[A lunar eclipse] can occur only when the Sun, Earth and Moon are aligned exactly, or very closely so, with the Earth in the middle. Hence, the Moon is always full during a lunar eclipse." The only requirement for an eclipse is alignment (or near-alignment) of these three bodies with the Earth between the other two. The full Moon is itself not a requirement--it's a consequence of the required alignment. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 14:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I see the change you've made - reads well - but I was under the impression the above comment was about the "two conditions" given in the opening paragraph of the Description section. There, the rotational and precessional motion has been decomposed, so the text is saying it has to be both at the right place in it's orbit, and passing through the ecliptic. To be honest, I think it's the phrasing - as two "conditions" - that's causing the problems. If it was simply stated that the Moon had to be near full/aligned behind the Earth, and passing though one of the two nodes, that would suffice. Saying that one of the nodes coincides with a full Moon is a single equivalent "condition"; hence the ambiguity. I think the best option is to remove all mention of "conditions" and simply explain what's physically happening. I'd do it but I'm so knackered I'd bork it right now. Spiral Wave 02:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Changed the part I was refering to now. Hope this is acceptable.

Looks good. I totally overlooked this bit in the Description section. Thanks for taking care of that. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 14:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yup, that's much better. Good jobs all round. Spiral Wave 18:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

List of lunar eclipses

I began work on a list of lunar eclipses, using the same format as the list of solar eclipses. So far it only contains the two 2007 eclipses, but there are 228 more this century and there are another 230 from the 20th century that we may want to include. Please place further discussion on the article's talk page. ··· rWd · Talk ··· 08:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Page Reverted due to poor edits

The article has undergone numerous changes in the last few weeks, and none appear for the better. I've reverted it to a previous version that seemed more substantial, grammatically correct, and informative. I'm unsure if useful edits were made in the last few weeks, it was hard to see through the changes for the worse which were made. At the least it is better to work from the reverted entry instead of the wholesale changes that had been made from what appeared to be inexperienced users.

Merge with Red Moon

Because of the simularities of the red moon and lunar eclipse page, plus the limited information on the Red moon page, I propose merging the two pages Iciac 08:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 eclipse image

I've taken a photo of the 2007 eclipse: [2]. I give permission for the image to be used in the article, or elsewhere in Wikipedia. I'd add it myself, but I have no idea how. :P -- Tiberius47 11:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is there no "path of totality" for a lunar eclipse?

For solar eclipses, it is well known that there is a relatively narrow path of totality, outside of which the eclipse either appears as partial, or cannot be viewed at all. This is not true for lunar eclipses: everyone on the night side of Earth sees very nearly the same eclipse. I believe this is because a "solar eclipse" is really an occultation of the sun by the moon. There is an observational difference between being in the shadow of something and casting a shadow on something. But I don't think the consequences of this difference are obvious to a layperson. Another way to think about it: from the moon's point of view, all "eclipses of the earth" (which we earthlings call solar eclipses) are penumbral, because the diameter of the moon's umbra is so much smaller than the earth's diameter. It may be possible to make other interesting comparisons between solar and lunar eclipses. Thanks. Dynamitecow 23:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I have a Question

Can there ever be a annular lunar eclipse? I'm curious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.205.202 (talk) 04:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

No, not with the moon's current distance, and the earth's diameter. The earth's angular size viewed from the moon is about 1.8 degrees, while the sun is about 0.5 degrees. So if the moon was over 3 times further away (or the earth 1/3 as big), it could happen then. Tom Ruen (talk) 07:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you see red until the moon is mostly eclipsed?

I would expect the encroaching dark part to be red too. Is it really red but somehow "washed out" for the camera by the non eclipsed white? What am I missing? This page is wonderful. Kendroberts (talk) 17:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

It's too bright. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 12:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Ustream reference inappropriate

The reference for today's eclipse to ustream is inappropriate. Ustream is not notable.67.170.234.221 (talk) 03:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Feb 20, 2008 Eclipse Visibility

The article falsely claims the eclipse was visible from Australia. This is NOT true as clearly explained by [3] -- Slashmasterc (talk) 13:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Fixed, strange. I couldn't tell if error was vandalism or loopy thinking, was correct on the article page! Tom Ruen (talk) 17:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Time sensitivity

I'm concerned that the section "Recent lunar eclipse events" is too time-sensitive, particularly the parts referring to "the next" lunar eclipse. Ref Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Words_whose_meaning_may_degrade_with_time. These wouldn't make sense in a print version of Wikipedia. I'm not sure what the best way to deal with this - one strategy is to have a table of lunar eclipses, together with a note that "This table was generated on <date>. Eclipses following this date are predicted and may change." Dcoetzee 23:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The timelapse

I really like that timelapse video on here -- Charlieh7337 (talk) 02:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Ugh ugh ugh ugh the moon is boring —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.244.40 (talk) 22:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Eclipse color image

The Sun's light color within the Earth's shadow.

This image and text was in the gallery. Can anyone confirm the correctness of this symbolic representation of the sunlight? I thought it was due to the blue light being scattered more than a refractive difference. Obviously the light inside the umbral shadow is all due to refraction through the atmosphere, but more than that I can't say. So feel free to move it back if anyone can defend it. It is pretty - deserves to be in a larger image connected to the text with a better description, again if true. Tom Ruen (talk) 06:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Misleading diagram

The diagram that leads off this article is quite misleading as the sun's rays are essentially parallel given the relative distances. (Discuss here or at the diagram's talk page.) Hgilbert (talk) 14:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Lunar eclipse photo gallery

[4]. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 21:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

"Lunar Eclipse" a Misnomer?

A solar eclipse occurs when the moon passes directly between us and the sun. A lunar eclipse is the same, but with earth and the moon in opposite places, i.e. earth eclipses the sun. It seems to me, semantically, that both are actually solar eclipses. A true lunar eclipse would only occur if something passed between earth and the moon. I'm not suggesting that we redefine the word, I'm just wondering if I'm thinking about it correctly and if so, perhaps something could be added to the article to reflect this.--Papa sausage (talk) 16:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Both terms refer to what happens to the object in question as viewed from earth. It's called a solar eclipse when the sun's (Latin, "sol") disk is darkened by the new moon and a lunar eclipse when the full moon's (Latin, "luna") disk is darkened by the earth. I hope that helps explain the terminology. Glenn L (talk) 23:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

See occultation for more explanation. SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 23:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Mie theory to add on the reddening of the moon during a lunar eclipse

In the article, the redding of the moon during a total lunar eclipse when the moon is in earth's umbra attributes it to Rayleigh scattering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering) but could it be a combined effect from mie theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mie_theory). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Etheleon (talk • contribs) 09:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit request from 12.13.70.254, 15 June 2011

When you google "Lunar Eclipse" and look at the search results on this, the metadata description provided is weird. Someone's been messing around?

12.13.70.254 (talk) 18:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

i think its hilarious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.24.205.236 (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Yup, funny.TheDarkOneLives (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Longevity of eclipses

The article states: "A lunar eclipse lasts for a few hours, whereas a total solar eclipse lasts for only a few minutes at any given place." That should be re-written, shouldn't it? "A few" seems too long. Fomalhaut76 (talk) 11:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

The one is december has occured n ended hopefully, now there been one which stiked 16/6/2011, and laed for few hours — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.109.37.61 (talk) 21:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Jorgelrm, 16 June 2011

I think that link to the June 15th eclipse is wrong. It needs to be corrected.

Jorgelrm (talk) 00:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

There was vandalism of the link in the template at Lunar_eclipse#2009.E2.80.932013, which is fixed now. Tom Ruen (talk) 00:29, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

GIF animation of Lunar eclipse on 2011 June 15

If needed I have prepared a GIF animation of the Lunar eclipse on 2011 June 15. Lunar eclipse of 2011 June 15 animation (small).gif. I am not going to watch this page, so contact me from my talk page. OCK (t·c) 18:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 86.173.169.157, 16 June 2011

This resulting light we perceive as red. This is the same effect that causes sunsets and sunrises to turn the sky a reddish color; an alternative way of considering the problem is to realize that, as viewed from the Moon, the Sun would appear to be setting (or rising) behind the Earth.

Please change considering the problem to considering the phenomenon because it is something to be explained, not something to be solved.

Thanks for considering. Roger Smith, roger_smith@iee.org

86.173.169.157 (talk) 09:36, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". GaneshBhakt (talk) 10:33, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Your assertion is wrong. It makes things needlessly confusing. The light of the eclipsed moon on it's way to the earth, (from the moon) is not affected by the effect you refer to. The scattering occurred when the light was on it's way from the sun to the moon. The way you propose to describe this is confusing. It's the same effect on the moon (from the earth's atmosphere), not the earth. --TimL (talk) 00:40, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Main image

I have changed the main image to File:Lunar eclipse June 2011 Total.jpg from File:Lunar Eclipse by Jiyang Chen.jpg which is less superior image in terms of quality and resolution. Please discuss before making further changes --Muhammad(talk) 20:39, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

The image was downsized to look properly on the page and to prevent improper usage of the original high resolution image. Thanks. --Jiyangc —Preceding undated comment added 06:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC).

See discussion below. Both images are fine. Lunar eclipse June 2011 Total.jpg is nicely cropped so I made it the summary image. I moved Lunar Eclipse by Jiyang Chen.jpg to a new picture gallery, it has too much black space around it for the summary image, but it is still good. And we need more. The usefulness of multiple eclipse images is to show the variation of the appearance of lunar eclipses, though in this case the two images (to my eyes) show how similar lunar eclipses can be (perhaps because they were only 6 months apart and the atmosphere had not changed much?) I don't mean to offend anyone but this article as it was was a mess. The images were all bunched together. I would appreciate that if either of you disagree with what I have done that you discuss it here first. Thanks. --TimL (talk) 01:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request 10 December 2011

Please add to "See Also" / Lunar eclipses in history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_2004_lunar_eclipse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_World_Series#Game_4 The first lunar eclipse to take place during a World Series game. It also marked the final game of this Series and the end of the Curse of the Bambino. (my apologies if this edit request was not formatted correctly in any way)

 Not done, the fact that an eclipse happened to take place at the same time as a baseball game does not appear to be notable, I'm sure you could find a thousand other such things--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:49, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

It was a significant game in baseball lore. Yes, it was purely coincidental, but so was the eclipse that occured during the Fall of Constantinople.

Wow that was harsh. Unceremoniously shot down by the wikigods. Not even worthy of good faith discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.76.15.86 (talk) 14:04, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

nothing to do with the "wikigods", but your own ignorance. A lunar eclipse is witnessed by an entire hemisphere of the earth, there are surely lots of things going on in an entire hemisphere during the length of a lunar eclipse. How is that for harsh? --TimL (talk) 22:52, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow. And now name calling. From the perspective of relevance to an entire hemisphere, there are tens or hundreds of thousand of Wikipedia articles irrelevant to entire hemispheres. e.g. individual articles for every episode of Family Guy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.76.15.86 (talk) 05:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request 25 May 2012

Can anyone add link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2012_lunar_eclipse)to Lunar Eclipse on June 4, 2012 in the section of Recent and forthcoming lunar eclipse events? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yukyankee (talk • contribs) 05:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

 Not done See below section. --TimL (talk) 22:04, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

'Moves into the shadow of the Earth' vs. 'Passes behind the Earth'

'A lunar eclipse occurs when the moon passes behind the Earth so that the Earth blocks the Sun's rays ...

'A lunar eclipse occurs when the moon moves into the Earth's shadow, so that the Earth blocks the Sun's rays ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Champagne (talk • contribs) 04:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Lunar eclipse and Moon phases

The lunar eclipse is probably observable in the lunar daylight hours from the MOON. I wonder if any of the subsequent lunar Apollo missions after Armstrong's mission observed the earth blotting out the Sun? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.176.170 (talk) 00:09, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

We all witness different lunar phases almost every day. According to this article, when the moon passes behind the earth's shadow, its a lunar eclipse. So does that mean that every time the moon is not full, its a lunar eclipse? I think its a good idea to mention about this in this article as well as the lunar phase article. Dont you think? Regards. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 03:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The phases aren't caused by Earth's shadow, but rather the Moon's own shadow. Similarly to how if there's one lamp around and you're facing it, your back isn't illuminated because you're in the way. Sideways713 (talk) 14:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Accuracy of Lunar eclipse optics.jpg?

If the explanation for the red colour of the moon during a lunar eclipse truly is Rayleigh scattering of shorter wavelength light by the Earth's atmosphere (as indicated in the article text), then surely this image is misleading? It seems to indicate that the atmosphere is acting as an inverted prism which is causing dispersion of the white sunlight by refraction. What do others think? Bobo12345 (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd generally agree it is misleading eye-candy. Tom Ruen (talk) 20:56, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

I second that. It's a really bad diagram. It's going. TimL • talk 05:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually according to the article at Rayleigh scattering this depiction is correct. The amount of scattering is proportional to the inverse of the wavelength and does create an "inverted prism" effect.  — TimL • talk 09:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh dear, upon further reflection I realize why this is a terribly inaccurate depiction of Rayleigh scattering as it would be seen from the moon. The earth scatters blue light, but the image suggests, from the point of view of the moon, that as the sun approaches the earth you would see the blue of the earth's sky which is wholly incorrect.  — TimL • talk 09:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2014

Animation video on Eclise by SarvaShikshan

Ganeshwatve (talk) 05:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Where should this go? --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 05:51, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Removed "Recent and forthcoming eclipses" section

Too much maintenance required and not appropriate for article. Template in article has relevant links to past and future eclipses.  — TimL • talk 22:00, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Eclipse dates don't change, so there shouldn't be any need for a lot of maintenance. What we need is a table with the dates of the near past and near future eclipses, and the data is all here. Also, I think it is very appropriate for this article. The date of past and future lunar eclipses is one of the first things I'd expect to see in an article about lunar eclipses, and in fact it was the thing I was looking for when I visited the article today. --Felipe (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

We have a table of past and future eclipses which I have put in the lead. I removed your reference to a specific eclipse. As far as finding the date of the next eclipse that can easily be found by using a search engine, e.g. [5].  — TimL • talk 15:52, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

The section has been restored based on how it is in the article solar eclipse, which is accessible requires little maintenance.  — TimL • talk 17:30, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Refraction doesn't make the moon red

The article says in two places that refraction through the Earth's atmosphere causes the red illumination of the moon. Why wouldn't that make it blue instead? Blue light refracts more than red, after all. Sunlight does indeed refract slightly as it passes through the atmosphere, raising the Sun's apparent position slightly at sunset and sunrise. The spread of color is pretty small, though; otherwise the setting sun would smear out into rainbow colors with blue setting last.

I'm changing the article to say that the red is scattered light. I realize it's a bit nit-picky; both scattering and refraction describe situations in which light changes direction. But they're really different things. Spiel496 (talk) 16:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Rereading what was there, I realize the article wasn't claiming that refraction caused the coloring. Still, the final change in direction that gets the reddened light into the shadow is scattering off a cloud droplet or other particle, not refraction. Spiel496 (talk) 16:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect. From [6] "The troposphere and stratosphere act together as a ring-shaped lens that refracts heavily reddened sunlight into Earth's umbral shadow". I have added this citation to the article.  — TimL • talk 17:08, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Also see atmospheric refraction. I have changed the article to link there instead of the more general article on refraction.  — TimL • talk 17:27, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

TimL is right, of course. I don't know what I was thinking. I didn't realize how small an angle the Earth subtends as seen from the Moon. Spiel496 (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit: March 1504 lunar eclipse

I added the section 'March 1504 Lunar Eclipse'. The information I added refers to Christopher Columbus and his prediction of a lunar eclipse in order to show to a group of inhabitants that he could make the moon disappear. Jordan (talk) 00:50, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposed Article Expansion: Cornell University Crowds, Communities and Technology

As part of a class assignment users Victoria (talk), Andrew (talk), Kieran (talk), and Jordan (talk) will be working on expanding this article. Below are some of the suggestions we hope to improve on in the article.

Citations

Many of the citations in Lunar Eclipse in Mythology, Blood Moon, and Occurrence lack sufficient citations. We hope we can bring some scientific data to support some of the claims made in these sections.

Lunar Eclipse in Mythology

This is the section we hope to expand the most on. This talkpage briefly describes some of the myths related to the Lunar Eclipse however we would like to expand on some of these myths to incorporate other cultures as well. For example, in many Asian cultures such as Chinese and Japanese, the Lunar Eclipses are a bad omen.

Lunar versus Solar Eclipse

There is often times a discrepancy where people confuse a Lunar Eclipse with a Solar Eclipse, so in the article we would like to briefly explain the difference between the two so that they can be distinctly understood.

Cultural Lunar Eclipses

In "interesting Facts About Lunar Eclipses", Chinese communities would ring bells to remove wild animals that bit the moonVmdavid (talk) 00:50, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

According to the University of Maryland Observatory, the Greek were ahead of their time when they said the earth was round and used the shadow from the Lunar Eclipse as evidence Vmdavid (talk) 01:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Some Hindus believe in the importance of bathing in the Ganges River following an eclipse because it will help you achieve salvation Vmdavid (talk) 01:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Many South East Asian cultures believe that it is bad for a pregnant woman to go outside during a lunar eclipse because it may be bad for the baby. Vmdavid (talk) 01:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

March 1504 Lunar Eclipse

Christopher Columbus was able to predict the lunar eclipse in order to wow the Native Americans. He was able to use tables and local clocks in order to predict when the lunar eclipse would happen, and was able to convince the inhabitants that he had the power to make the moon disappear and then reappear.

Multimedia

We were also planning on adding some more pictures or videos of the Lunar Eclipse to this article. For example, many websites provide detailed diagrams of the lunar eclipse

Ajbose (talk) 01:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey folks. Great outline of your proposal and initial list of sources. For tomorrow's class, make sure you have expanded this list to include the full bibliography you will be using to improve this article. For adding images, make sure you are following the copyright guidelines - that the images you are inserting are in the public domain, or properly licensed. LeshedInstructor (talk) 01:51, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Victoria (talk), Andrew (talk), Kieran (talk), and Jordan (talk) - It seems like you all have a great outline for your edits, but I don't see any have been made. I know you were looking to get some information from other Wikipedians, but have you been able to receive any feedback? If not from the editors who have been active on this page, then from the Teahouse? Or from editors on similar articles, like Solar eclipse, moon, NASA? Let me know if you need assistance! -Easowers (talk) 19:37, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Initial Sources

Britt, Robert R. "Nine Cool Facts about the Lunar Eclipse." http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6337791/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/nine-cool-facts-about-lunar-eclipse/#.VBoq7i5dXbw. NBC News, 18 June 2010. Web. 18 Sept. 2014. Japanese people cover their wells during lunar eclipses, people native to Arctic regions turn over their utensils during eclipses, and others yell at the moon.

"National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office." Solar and Lunar Eclipses. National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office, 18 May 2012. Web. 18 Sept. 2014. <http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/?n=suneclipse>. This article discusses the differences between total, penumbral, and partial lunar eclipses. Total eclipses are when no part of the moon is illuminated, and penumbral eclipses are when the earth’s outer region is blocking the sun, but not the main region, which makes the eclipse harder to see, and partial lunar eclipses are when the earth goes in front of the moon more than penumbral lunar eclipses, but not as much as total lunar eclipses.

"Different Stages in Lunar Eclipse." Lunar Eclipses. Hong Kong Observatory, 27 Dec. 2012. Web. 18 Sept. 2014. <http://www.hko.gov.hk/gts/event/event-lunar-eclps12_e.htm>. A good graph and explanations of the penumbral, partial, and total lunar eclipses. We will probably add the graph, and support the graph with what is written describing the lunar eclipses in detail.

--Jordan (talk) 04:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

References

That sounds like a promising list. I've not looked at the article recently, and see at least this graphic was removed at some point [7], by User:Timl, in June 2011, with comment I don't understand "removed image that is already is the "see also" articles (redundant))" . Tom Ruen (talk) 02:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

We are going to be adding a section that distinctively explains the difference and clarifies the confusion between a solar and lunar eclipse. Using information from both the solar eclipse page and outside sources, I will be given an expanded explanation of the true difference. Ajbose (talk) 00:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit Lunar versus Solar Eclipse Section

I edited the Appearance section to show a difference between the appearance of a Lunar and Solar Eclipse. We used sources from www.cm.noaa.gov as our reference for information on the topic. Ajbose (talk) 01:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I suggest making some changes in this section. In its current states, it has four subsections:

1. Lunar eclipse appearance - describes the appearance of a lunar eclipse
2. Solar eclipse appearance - describes what a solar eclipse is and what it appears like - I suggest substantially condensing this section because there is a section about solar eclipse. You could direct to there and simply explain the differences between the two, in effect and in appearance
3. Selenelion - it is unclear why this subsection appears under the section "lunar versus solar eclipse.
4. Danjon scale - again, unclear why this subsection is in the section on lunar vs solar eclipse.

Also, please make sure to use sentence case in headings: first letter of first word should be upper case, and the rest in lower case letters. Formally: "Capitalize the first letter of the first word, but leave the rest lower case (except for proper names and other items that would ordinarily be capitalized in running text). Thus Section headings, not Section Headings; Previous club, not Previous Club." LeshedInstructor (talk) 23:20, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Creation of Lunar Eclipse in Culture Section

At first we were looking into adding on this section to the mythology section but it made more sense to make this its own subsection. There are mythological claims about lunar eclipses but I think it is more important to highlight the cultural differences in how each culture interprets this phenomenon. I am currently looking into adding on more to this section and possibly creating different subsections and divide it by regionVmdavid (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

After taking into consideration some of the peer feedback we received, I went ahead and fixed some of the grammatical errors and sentence structure for this sectionVmdavid (talk) 01:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Lunar Versus Solar Eclipse

Why do we need to be lectured as if we are ignorant? Keep to the topic please.SovalValtos (talk) 22:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

SovalValtos, I'm a teaching assistant for these students who are editing this page and others like Spam (food). While I appreciate your point that maybe the idea of inputting a section about Lunar v. Solar eclipse could be construed as condescending, please keep in mind these are students who are only trying to help. They're still learning how to edit Wikipedia and would love positive constructive criticism! I'm happy you've been so vocal on so many of our pages, as the students can really learn from you, just make sure you remember they're still new at this. Thanks so much! Easowers (talk) 21:57, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

My comment about lecturing related to the content of the page. I thought the page was lecturing us with off topic material. Knowing which pages you consider "our pages" would not change editing as ownership is not a good idea.SovalValtos (talk) 07:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@SovalValtos:: Thanks for your comment. Please be more specific about where there is off-topic lecturing material and the students will fix that. The use of "our" is a figure of speech to represent the set of articles the students have chosen to work as part of their Wikipedia assignment in the class - students are aware that they don't "own" the articles but they are collaborating with others (like you!) to improve them. For more information about which articles are in this process, see the course talk page. If you have questions about editing articles as part of a course assignment, please contact Jami Mathewson from the Wiki Education Foundation. Thank you. LeshedInstructor (talk) 13:29, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

SovalValtos, these are new editors; if you think the tone is inappropriate please try to improve it or, failing that, you could you provide more specific criticisms, actual concrete examples of what you think should be changes? Please remember that WP:BITE applies here. Thanks. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:19, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@SovalValtos:: I am not completely sure what you mean by this statement. Please notice the course assignment template at the top of the page, and if you have concrete suggestions to the student editors, please make them. I agree that a thorough description of the appearance of solar eclipse does not need to appear in this article. However, such a suggestion can be made clearly and in a friendly manner. Please assume good faith and don't bite the newbies. Thank you! LeshedInstructor (talk) 23:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Visibility

Might it be worth mention the moon is still visible during an eclipse? I have no refs but there is an image on the page.SovalValtos (talk) 20:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Feedback for Victoria (talk), Andrew (talk), Kieran

Contents

Organization and Style Refer to Solar eclipse for layout and organization. It is marked as an exceptionally good Wikipedia article, and modeling this article after it might be useful to readers who are interested in reading about both eclipses. Specifically, consider adding a "Predictions" header. Also, reorganizing the headers to match the Solar eclipse header order can be more straightforward to readers. Another thing is that “lunar eclipse in culture” is very vague for a section header. Consider combining it under an overarching header—maybe “Interpretations of Lunar Eclipse”—with “Lunar eclipse in mythology”. Also, consider elaborating more on the interpretations in different cultures beyond brief overviews. In addition, consider moving “Blood moon” under another header titled “Other observations”, similar to solar eclipse. Tkw32 (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Sources

1. I Notice that the first paragraph does not have any citations. Perhaps you would want to add them
2. One source I noticed that has a questionable reliability is source 6: www.skyandtelescope.com. The source looks like a blog so I don’t know if it is a reliable source.
3. All of your references appear to be formatted correctly! 18:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggested changes to Lunar Eclipse Article

Overall:

1- Added some comas and fixed sentence structure

2- Maybe it would be good to consider cutting short sentences in the first paragraph of the Lunar Eclipse Appearance subtopic were it is hard to find the flow of the paragraph, which makes it hard to read.

3- The content is good but sentences are too long!

Specific changes:

1- In Types of Lunar eclipse, I would rearrange this sentence and add parenthesis for the last part of the sentence. It would be easier to understand if it was written the following way: However, as a result of the Sun's large angular size, solar illumination is only partially blocked in the outer portion of the Earth's shadow (named penumbra).

2-Rearrange sentence structure: choose a) There is often confusion between a solar and (a) lunar eclipse or b) There is often confusion between solar and lunar eclipses.

3-Under Lunar Versus Solar Eclipse section, and subtopic Kunar Ecklipse Appearance, I would cut this sentence in two by adding a period after “cone.” “The Moon does not completely disappear as it passes through the umbra because of the refraction of sunlight by the Earth’s atmosphere into the shadow cone; if the Earth had no atmosphere, the Moon would be completely dark during an eclipse. --Mfrosselot (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Additional feedback

Thank you very much for your contributions to the article. I have a few thoughts on how you could improve this a little more.

1. Section titles: these should not be capitalized: "Lunar versus solar eclipse" not "Lunar Versus Solar Eclipse", "Lunar eclipse appearance" not "Lunar Eclipse Appearance", etc.
2. In the Lunar_Versus_Solar_Eclipse section, you have two sentences saying, in essence, that they are often confused, but they are different. A statement like that is a bit of a teaser - it just tells the reader 'keep reading'. If you could add a sentence that captures the essence of the difference between the two, something that says 'here's what it is, now keep reading for details', you will have created something that's more satisfying to read.
3. You need to be a bit more careful in your wording. In the Lunar_eclipse_in_Culture section (which should be 'culture' not 'Culture') you say that "In South East Asia..." when the source actually refers to India (which is South Asia not Southeast Asia). It's also better to be more specific - "some believe" is an example of so-called "weasel words" which you should try to avoid. (This is true for other sentences in that section as well). In addition, since you have two assertions about Hindu culture, you might want to unify them, rather than separate them with the statement about the Greeks.)
4. In the March_1504_Lunar_Eclipse ("lunar" and "eclipse" shouldn't be capitalized here) you should add a link to the main article on the topic right at the top, in it's own line, before any of the text: {{seemain|March 1504 lunar eclipse}}. You probably also don't want to refer to this as a legend - Columbus' voyages are supported by contemporary sources (copies of his logs) so that makes them a bit more than legends.

Again, thank you for your contributions to the article. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 12:39, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

• I deleted the term 'legend' from the March 1504 Lunar Eclipse section. It is more founded by historical sources than a typical legend might. Thank you for your helpful comments! Jordan (talk) 19:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@Ian (Wiki Ed)::Thanks for your feedback! I made the capitalization changes you suggested, and took out the part about South East Asia entirely after I realized it was actually referencing a belief about solar eclipses. KieranKinnare (talk) 00:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit: Structural change

I added the 'Selenelion' section as a subsection of 'Types of lunar eclipse' and changed the subsection 'Danjon scale' to a section by itself. Jordan (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit: Added subsections to the section 'Lunar eclipse in mythology'

I added the subsections 'Incans' and 'Mesopotamians' to the section 'Lunar eclipse in mythology' Jordan (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Minor edit requests

Under the heading Solar eclipse appearance, the apostrophe in "when the Moon casts it's shadow on Earth" should be removed. Also, the article seems to lack Template:pp at the top. To remove confusion, it should be added (unless the semi-protection can be lifted). 85.226.205.208 (talk) 07:38, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 02:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Fixing a mess

All the images were stuck together at the top of the article and not in an appropriate section. Also some of the images merely added artistic value and I moved them to a new gallery section. The 'hook' image I made to be more consistent with the solar eclipse article which is a smallish representative thumbnail that fits alongside the hook (summary). There was an additional nice image of a lunar eclipse, I moved that to the newly created gallery. Also there was an excessively long list of 'recent and upcoming eclipses' many of which were not recent at all but decades ago. I removed those. I think what is left is a much cleaner article with the images more appropriately placed. If you disagree with what I've done, I'd appreciate it if you discuss it here before making changes. Thanks. --TimL (talk) 00:34, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Completely removed the charts of recent and upcoming eclipses. These can be found by clicking on the links already given under "recent and upcoming eclipses", so there is no reason to have had them here. --TimL (talk) 12:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The June 15, 2011 eclipse and Wiki vandalism

On June 15, 2011, a lunar eclipse led to a rash of juvenile vandalism on this article. Among the edits was one by some wag, an anonymous IP, that said "A lunar eclipse is when the moon turns black and explodes, releasing a poisonous gas, killing all humanity". That edit was repeated a couple of times before Ultraexactzz tried to put the kibosh on the vandalism by semiprotection. It was semiprotected for perhaps two days, and then the vandals struck again. And again. And again. (As for the edit I mentioned, someone did it again as late as August 1, 2011, and at least one person posted a Google screenshot showing the vandalism of June 15. Although the view count of that show was not very high, it may have nonetheless contributed to the Lunar Eclipse vandalism plague of 2011. (The comments by "Rickyrab" are not coincidential. I posted them there, and, yes, I admit to finding some of the vandalism to be humorous, which is why I liked Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense way back when.)

Anyway, I wonder if anything should be done about people who post Wikipedia stuff on Youtube or if we should leave the matter alone. I wonder if there is still a big enough risk of vandalism on "Lunar eclipse" to warrant continuing to semiprotect "Lunar eclipse". — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 19:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm confused, are you making an argument that the article should be semi-protected (it is) or that it shouldn't? Is your question rhetorical? Thanks in advance. --TimL (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

^ the above is proof that autistic wikipedia editors have absolutely no sense of humor whatsoever — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.83.108.3 (talk) 08:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Eclipse Photography

I had been looking for images of eclipses and i found a special one, it also had attracted two interesting comments on how the image turned out like this - so I request that other photographers consider having an infrared filter handy for the next eclipse and see how it turns out... Eclipse Image at FLICKR Charlieb000 (talk) 20:55, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2015

72.234.48.3 (talk) 00:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC) I like bananas sssooooooo... bye :)

Obvious troll is obvious. Kharkiv07 (T) 00:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2015

Hi there! I wanted to add an external link to the Lunar eclipse article. Since a very recent one happened, I think it would be good to have an external link referring to the Supermoon lunar eclipse of 2015 ( I was going to put this link: https://thebeautyinspace.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/the-great-supermoon-red-moon-of-2015/ ). Hope you consider this! Cheers, Gonçalo

Gonmrm (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be any unique information there. There's information on the supermoon here September_2015_lunar_eclipse#Supermoon. Tom Ruen (talk) 16:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2015

The information in this sentences Delete this: "A lunar eclipse lasts for a few hours, whereas a total solar eclipse lasts for only a few minutes at any given place, 1due to the smaller size of the Moon's shadow. Also unlike solar eclipses, lunar eclipses are safe to view without any eye protection or special precautions, as they are dimmer than 2the full moon." Replace it with this: "A lunar eclipse lasts for a few hours, whereas a total solar eclipse lasts for only a few minutes at any given place, due to the speed with which the smaller moon crosses in between the earth and the sun. The earth is much bigger and takes longer to move between the moon and the sun. Also unlike solar eclipses that can damage your eyes due to the intense brightness of the sun, lunar eclipses are safe to view without any eye protection or special precautions. 2601:186:4101:3C09:12DD:B1FF:FEF3:340A (talk) 05:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. JustBerry (talk) 18:04, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Introduction

Not well written.

"Hence, there is always a full moon the day of a lunar eclipse." But for a given lunar eclipse, it will in some places be noon at the centre of the eclipse; a lunar eclipse does not possess a night. Better to say something like "Lunar eclipses can only occur when the Moon is full.".

"The next total lunar eclipse will occur on December 21, 2010 at 8:17 UTC." - no, it will occur over an interval centred on that time. The whole event lasts for about 5.5 hours, and totality lasts for over an hour.

82.163.24.100 (talk) 11:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I also think it is important to add citations in the introduction. Even for something as simple as the time frame of a lunar eclipse should show some scientific evidence to back up that claim Vmdavid (talk) 00:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

"A lunar eclipse occurs when the Moon passes directly behind the Earth into its umbra (shadow)."

We use the word 'behind' with the implicit understanding '... in relation to an observer'. If we want to say "... behind the Earth", we have to say from which vantage point the one object (the Moon) will be hidden behind the other (the Earth). Behind in relation to what?

Suggest change to: "A lunar eclipse occurs when the Moon passes into the Earth's shadow or umbra [[8]]."

"... sunlight completely blocked by the earth's shadow."

Shadows do not block light. They are a result of light being blocked by an opaque object.

Change to: "... sunlight completely blocked by the Earth."

Also:

"The only light seen is refracted through the earth's shadow."

Change to:

"The only sunlight reaching the moon is that which is scattered through the Earth's atmosphere."

John Champagne (talk) 23:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Can't edit, Rayleigh scattering should have a capital "R". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.37.102.34 (talk) 16:25, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Blood moon in media (the guardian article accuracy)

The second paragraph of the "Blood Moon" section describing colloquial usages for the term:

Blood Moon is not a scientific term but has come to be used due to the reddish color seen on a Super Moon during the lunar eclipse

does not acknowledge that it is an alternate meaning from that described in the first paragraph:

In addition, in the 2010s the media started to associate the term with the four full moons of a lunar tetrad, especially ...

A superficial internet search between 2014-2016 does not support this usage other than the Guardian article, so it may be a mistaken claim in this one article.

The second sentence sourced from the Guardian article is also a repetition of information given in the rest of the article and the first paragraph.

When sunlight passes through the earth's atmosphere, it filters and refracts in such a way that the green to violet lights on the spectrum scatters more strongly than the red light, causing the moon to receive a reddish tinge.

I recommend removing the second paragraph of the section or at most combining relevant information in the section in a more understandable way.

Thanks!

[moved content to new edit request below]

Heishha (talk) 19:33, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2018 : Blood moon in media

The second paragraph of the Blood_moon section describing colloquial usages for the term:

Blood Moon is not a scientific term but has come to be used due to the reddish color seen on a Super Moon during the lunar eclipse

does not acknowledge that it is an alternate meaning from that described in the first paragraph:

In addition, in the 2010s the media started to associate the term with the four full moons of a lunar tetrad, especially ...

A superficial internet search between 2014-2016 does not support this usage other than the Guardian article, so it may be a mistaken claim in this one article.

The second sentence sourced from the Guardian article is also a repetition of information given in the rest of the article and the first paragraph.

When sunlight passes through the earth's atmosphere, it filters and refracts in such a way that the green to violet lights on the spectrum scatters more strongly than the red light, causing the moon to receive a reddish tinge.

I recommend removing the second paragraph of the section (the first and third quoted text above) until an another source is added.

Thanks! Heishha (talk) 03:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

 Partly done: This request is correct in stating that the section was previously written in a confusing manner and did not adequately distinguish the two meaning of the term, one being a simple optical appearance and one a (failed) apocalyptic prophecy. The section has been re-written to separate these and clarify the relationship between them. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:49, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 February 2018

In the subsection [Lunar eclipse in culture : Incans] the image file [Blood Moon Graphic.png] has the umbra and the penumbra labels swapped, compared with other pictures in the article. It need to be corrected. Aadubaisi (talk) 20:37, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done And thank you for noticing and bringing this to attention. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:02, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used in this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The file Lunar eclipse chart close-2009aug06.png on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for speedy deletion. View the deletion reason at the Commons file description page. Community Tech bot (talk) 05:51, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Edit request (relative frequency of total eclipses)

In the section on occurrences the article currently says that "total eclipses are significantly less common" than partial eclipses. However, total eclipses seem to make up about 1/4 - 1/2 of the listed eclipses. I wouldn't call this significantly less. "Significantly less" would, I think, usually indicate at least a factor of 10. Here we have a factor of 2-4. I suggest that the word significantly is simply removed, since total eclipses are clearly less common than partial eclipses but not significantly so. This seems important (on a relative scale) given the general over importance that the media seems to ascribe to total eclipses (many news articles being published about each one, which seems out of proportion to the interestingness of a natural phenomena that is almost yearly). 120.18.60.163 (talk) 11:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Image of Christopher Columbus

The image does not show Christopher Columbus predicting a Lunar eclipse - it show him *indicating* a Lunar eclipse.~~GaryGMason~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryGMason (talk • contribs) 11:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Lunar eclipse January 31 2018 California Alfredo Garcia Jr mideclipse.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Typo edit request. February 20, 2020

In the second paragraph of the "Types of lunar eclipses" section, the word "about" is spelled with two o's:

”The penumbra causes a subtle dimming of the lunar surface, which is only visible to the naked eye when aboout 70% of the Moon's diameter has immersed into Earth's penumbra." Beanpoleahead (talk) 08:47, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Mindmatrix 14:45, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

The very first sentence doesn't make sense

"A lunar eclipse occurs when the Moon into the Earth's shadow." Is a non-native English speaker in charge of this locked page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kornbelt888 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Kornbelt888, fixed —¿philoserf? (talk) 16:37, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Penumbral lunar eclipse 2006 March 14 Warrenton VA.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:38, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Penumbral lunar eclipse 2006 March 14 Warrenton VA.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2021

The image with the diagram of Solar and Lunar eclipse says that a lunar eclipse occurs at night and a solar eclipse at day. Kindly add - "with respect to the place on Earth where the eclipse is going to take place." in the sentence as it is misleading to say that for a given country, every year the eclipses will occur at night or at day. They may occur anytime with respect to a particular country but only at day and night for the countries where the eclipse will occur. 117.214.174.64 (talk) 06:35, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. Too verbose; not a major source of confusion. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 10:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

The antisolar point vs center of Earth’s shadow

The antisolar point marks the opposite of the Sun’s position whereas the center of Earth’s shadow varies in position depending on where you view it. During a central lunar eclipse, the center of Earth’s umbral shadow relative to the antisolar point will actually depend on where you view the effect of the eclipse. If you view it from North, South, east, or west of Earth’s direction toward the Moon or shadows (as seen by Earth’s terminator especially), you’ll see that the antisolar point is off by over 1° whereas if you’re right in the middle of Earth’s opposite position from the Sun during such an eclipse, you’ll see the center of the shadow align with the antisolar point.

Not everyone sees those points merge even during a central lunar eclipse, meaning those closer to the terminator will see the Moon miss the anti solar point during any lunar eclipse whereas only those in the mid point of Earth’s opposite place from the Sun will see those points collide (and the Moon passing through them).

So on the part where it says that the Moon crosses the antisolar point during a central lunar eclipse, it should be added that it also depends on the viewing location as while the Moon is seen crossing the shadow center from any location where the Moon is visible, the Moon doesn’t always cross the antisolar point as seen in every location, because the closer to the terminator, the more the shadow center and antisolar point appear separated. 67.235.204.246 (talk) 16:41, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2022

catagory:mytholgysome people think it only happens when a blood moon. is summoned and the wyvern of hades is killed. and sacrificed to the god on the moon. then the rim of heaven is exposed and engulfs the moon giving the effect of a lunar eclipse. This is for class111 (talk)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2022 (2)

some people think it only happens when a blood moon. is summoned and the wyvern of hades is killed. and sacrificed to the god on the moon. then the rim of heaven is exposed and engulfs the moon giving the effect of a lunar eclipse. This is for class111 (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Explain your request and provide sources for the changes you want, don't keep opening edit requests Cannolis (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2022

The page mentions two conditions for a lunar eclipse to occur: syzygy and a full moon. In fact, if the first condition holds (syzygy with the Earth between the moon and the sun), the moon is necessarily full *and* the moon is at/near the ecliptic (i.e., near a lunar node). The mention of the full moon as an additional condition without mentioning the lunar nodes/ecliptic is confusing and leaves out key information for someone trying to fully understand why and when lunar eclipses happen.

I suggest the following revised wording for the second sentence: "This can occur only when the Sun, Earth, and Moon are exactly or very closely aligned (in syzygy) with Earth between the other two, which can happen only on the night of a full moon when the moon is near either lunar node." [link to Lunar_node] Ixnayamenay (talk) 09:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done, that is better. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)